Corrupt Judicial Bias by Trump Appointed Judge.

[Binger]

The "special master" is pointless. Deflect, buy time. People make fun of the incompetency of Trump's legal council, but there's a method to the madness. As long as they buy time and stretching things out, they're doing their jobs.

Gad. Say you are sorry. This is a cynical take on the legal profession. Apologize to a lawyer. Thanks.

[Gunnar]

I'm likely about to expose my naïvété.

I'm afraid I don't see what the big deal is with the appointment of a special master, beyond a waste of tax-payer dollars. The DOJ's filter team has already reviewed everything. The purpose for the warrant was seemingly to see if there were classified materials still being kept by Trump. There were, and they have been recovered.

Is there some bizarre reason to think that a court-appointed third party with the relevant clearance levels would look at a marked government classified document, and say "errrmm... yeah... this is like, totes lawyer client stuff." If anything, it's probably the right move to make. I would think the DOJ would want a third party involved if for nothing more than optics at this point. Worse case, there's incriminating documents to unrelated crimes that get turned back over. Whatever those unrelated crimes are (if they exist), they are outside of the scope of the DOJ's investigation and warrant.

I have the same questions. I’ve seen several versions of this story that are over-hyped. The judge did not decide anything in her order. She stated her preliminary intent, subject to receipt of additional information. That’s not an unusual thing for a judge to do. Neither is appointing a special master to review documents and make recommendations with respect to claims of privilege.

No special master has been appointed. The DOJ has submitted the additional information requested by the judge and has had the opportunity to respond to to the judge’s preliminary inclination. Personally, I like to have some idea of the judge’s initial impression of an issue so that I can focus on what the judge is concerned about. Otherwise, I can end up wasting pages addressing arguments that judge doesn’t care about or may not need briefing on.

I see no evidence of corruption or incompetence in what the judge has done so far. It’s generally best to wait to see an actual ruling before crying foul.

Given the breadth of the warrant, I would expect that the seized boxes include some materials between Trump and his lawyers in his non-presidential capacity. Determining whether those materials are subject to the attorney-client privilege is unlikely to be straightforward because there is a civil fraud exception to the privilege that I expect will be an issue. In my state, the possible application of that exception generally results in some kind of confidential review of the documents by a judge, magistrate or special master.

The Justice Department has its own screening process, but the Judge doesn’t have to rely on it (and probably shouldn’t in this case). By requesting copies of the inventory of what was taken, she’s doing her job. I’d suggest waiting to see how she does it before getting out the torches and pitchforks.

A federal judge has lifetime tenure. They aren’t beholden to anyone.

Thank you. It is your input I was looking forward to the most on this issue. As usual, you left me much better informed than I was before and made me realize that Judge Cannon's decision was not necessarily as sinister, incompetent or biased as I originally suspected. I do still think, though, that her being a Trump appointee so soon after Trump's false claim of a stolen election raises some legitimate doubts about her impartiality with regard to Trump -- especially when considering how rapidly she made that ruling before even getting any input from the other side.

[Res Ipsa]

I’ve now read the response brief of the DOJ and the proposed amicus brief. Something I learned — the judge doesn’t have subject matter jurisdiction, which is fatal to Trump’s case. The Presidential Records Act vests exclusive jurisdiction in the federal court for the District of Columbia.

It’s unlikely any Florida District judge is familiar with the PRA because lawyers generally avoid filing suits before judges who lack jurisdiction to hear the case. In my experience, your typical federal judge would read the riot act to Trump’s lawyers for concealing that significant problem. Lawyers have a duty of candor toward the judge, and bringing a lawsuit under a statute that says the court has no jurisdiction without calling the judge’s attention to the issue and presenting an argument that addresses the jurisdictional problem is not exactly being candid with the judge.

Subject matter jurisdiction is first-year law student stuff. Trump gets to file a reply tomorrow, but the jurisdictional problem doesn’t look fixable to me. I expect the judge to dismiss the case.

[Binger]

In the meantime, DOJ shares a redacted application for the raid and pictures of documents they scattered on the floor.

They are going all in on a conviction and completely crapping their reputation and credibility. Huge gamble for three elections.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

In the meantime, DOJ shares a redacted application for the raid and pictures of documents they scattered on the floor.

They are going all in on a conviction and completely crapping their reputation and credibility. Huge gamble for three elections.

Have read the “application” in full “for the raid” and “pictures of documents scattered on the floor?”

— Doc

[Binger]

In the meantime, DOJ shares a redacted application for the raid and pictures of documents they scattered on the floor.

They are going all in on a conviction and completely crapping their reputation and credibility. Huge gamble for three elections.

Have read the “application” in full “for the raid” and “pictures of documents scattered on the floor?”

— Doc

Is there a translation available for this post?

[Gadianton]

DOJ shares a redacted application for the raid and pictures of documents they scattered on the floor.

Right, "they" being Donald Trump.

[canpakes]

… completely crapping their reputation and credibility. Huge gamble for three elections.

You’d figure that Republicans would know better than to yell for defunding the police, and know better than defending folks who try to walk out of the White House with top secret documents that they shouldn’t have. Or that they’d know better than to defend a grifter who claims to not have known better than to do so. That certainly is completely “crapping their reputation and credibility”.

[Res Ipsa]

In the meantime, DOJ shares a redacted application for the raid and pictures of documents they scattered on the floor.

They are going all in on a conviction and completely crapping their reputation and credibility. Huge gamble for three elections.

No. Judge Reinhart shared the redacted search warrant applications. The DOJ argued it should be kept sealed.

The photo documents what was found in the leather case. Nowhere does the the DOJ say they were found in that condition. If you look at how LEOs document searches and seizures, it’s a standard photo.

But, of course, this is just burying the lede. The photo shows that Trump retained classified documents in his office even after his “records custodian” claimed under oath that the premises had been thoroughly searched, that the only classified documents found had been kept in the storage area, and that all classified documents had been turned over. The DOJ isn’t risking anything except the usual smears from conspiracy theorists.

[Res Ipsa]

DOJ shares a redacted application for the raid and pictures of documents they scattered on the floor.

Right, "they" being Donald Trump.

No, I’m sure the photo was taken to document what was found in the leather case. It shows what was found as well as showing the classified documents were found as part of the search.