Re: Trump's Classified Docs Theft: Mar-A-Lago, FBI Subpoenas, Searches & Seizures - DOJ, Garland, GOP Madness - Spy Hard
Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2022 7:31 am
And charge his legal team rent for it against their fees, don't forget.
Falsehoods Unchallenged Only Fester and Grow
http://thefogbow.com/forum/
And charge his legal team rent for it against their fees, don't forget.
I’m guessing it’s a retainer because Trump.Kendra wrote: ↑Sat Sep 17, 2022 7:55 pm Speaking of Kise and the $3M payment, Neil Katyal was on MSNBC earlier this week and pointed out that this was a staggering figure for even the biggest cases. I don't think it's clear if this was a retainer in case he got stiff, or if those fees were already racked up for services rendered.
Ben-Prime:
And charge his legal team rent for it against their fees, don't forget.
With Zee Furher, mysteriously the rent charged will far exceed any legal fees....Tiredretiredlawyer wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 12:06 pmBen-Prime:
And charge his legal team rent for it against their fees, don't forget.
Ditto,realist wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 11:02 amI’m guessing it’s a retainer because Trump.Kendra wrote: ↑Sat Sep 17, 2022 7:55 pm Speaking of Kise and the $3M payment, Neil Katyal was on MSNBC earlier this week and pointed out that this was a staggering figure for even the biggest cases. I don't think it's clear if this was a retainer in case he got stiff, or if those fees were already racked up for services rendered.
That said I find it hard to believe Katyal stated that’s a staggering figure for even the biggest cases. Not even close. I’ve been involved in many cases over the years where I know the attorney fees were well in excess of $3M. Heck I’ve been involved in a few where the SECR fees were in the 7 figures.
I also believe if it’s a retainer it will be eaten up very quickly.
Wasn't he one of Trump's suggestions though? I know his lawyers do not have a reputation for being all that good, but one would think that when asked to submit only two possible names they would select someone they were pretty sure would be in their camp, no?Foggy wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 5:49 pm First thing, he's a highly respected lawyer and judge, with a truly impressive résumé, but you can check around. But that makes me suspect that he knows how bad Judge Cannon’s order is, and we'll have to see what comes of that. He may say he's taking the job but we're doing things his way or the highway, and his way might not be the same as Judge Loose.
Second, if he really is a Reagan Republican, and since he spent all those years in Noo Yawk City, there's a good chance he already despises Trump and has been too polite to say so in public. Nobody in Noo Yawk likes Trump. Ronald Reagan would have despised Trump. If there are sane Republicans left, maybe Judge Dearie is one of them.
Unless there's been something new, the 11th Circuit said nothing to alter FRAP 27(a)(4), which provides: “Any reply to a response must be filed within 7 days after service of the response." And while I too have fantasies about a circuit slap already being drafted for release on Tuesday at 2:00 pm (and a pony -- h/t Belle Waring & John Holbo), a reply brief can be crucial when you're dealing with lying bullshitters (both terms applicable here).Foggy wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 5:49 pm The 11th Circuit issued a deadline for the opposition brief, but what about a reply to the opposition, from the government? Was that ordered, and what does it mean if they don't need to see a reply brief?
Dare I hope that the court ordered an accelerated opposition and no reply brief because it plans to issue the stay?
Sometimes it's easy to draft a reply brief (or at least the bones of one) before you know what you're replying to, and sometimes it's not. Sometimes I forego them, particularly if the only thing I can really say is '"Is too!" in response to the government's "Is not!"chancery wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 7:12 pmUnless there's been something new, the 11th Circuit said nothing to alter FRAP 27(a)(4), which provides: “Any reply to a response must be filed within 7 days after service of the response." And while I too have fantasies about a circuit slap already being drafted for release on Tuesday at 2:00 pm (and a pony -- h/t Belle Waring & John Holbo), a reply brief can be crucial when you're dealing with lying bullshitters (both terms applicable here).Foggy wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 5:49 pm The 11th Circuit issued a deadline for the opposition brief, but what about a reply to the opposition, from the government? Was that ordered, and what does it mean if they don't need to see a reply brief?
Dare I hope that the court ordered an accelerated opposition and no reply brief because it plans to issue the stay?
In light of the order shortening Trump's response time from 10 days to four, I imagine that the government would be well advised to get its reply in by Wednesday morning at the latest, Tuesday night if possible.
He's not going to give them free office space. He will charge them over-market rates, let them put it on their bill and then pay that bill with money donated to his PAC. That way, the money finds its way into his pockets.
Oh, I realize that the denizens of Trumpworld couldn't care less whether something is legal or not, but some of us in the real world do care. I'm not that naive.Sam the Centipede wrote: ↑Sat Sep 17, 2022 11:54 pmIt's so sweet that you think that might be a remotely relevant question in Trumpworld!
noblepa wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 10:13 pmOh, I realize that the denizens of Trumpworld couldn't care less whether something is legal or not, but some of us in the real world do care. I'm not that naive.Sam the Centipede wrote: ↑Sat Sep 17, 2022 11:54 pmIt's so sweet that you think that might be a remotely relevant question in Trumpworld!
Hopefully, some LEOs in the real world care, as well.
As I said, the rules about what can be done with a PAC's money change if/when TFG formally announces his candidacy. That may be one reason for the huge retainer (if that's what it was). Maybe he knows that after he announces, he can't use the PAC money for that, so he's, in effect, prepaying his legal fees with PAC money while he legally can.
Unless it's already come up due to the time zone difference (I sleep while y'all are busiest, it seems), Axios has a supposition about this that Dearie is believed from his time on the FISA court to be 'suspicious' of the FBI.neeneko wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 6:18 pmWasn't he one of Trump's suggestions though? I know his lawyers do not have a reputation for being all that good, but one would think that when asked to submit only two possible names they would select someone they were pretty sure would be in their camp, no?Foggy wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 5:49 pm First thing, he's a highly respected lawyer and judge, with a truly impressive résumé, but you can check around. But that makes me suspect that he knows how bad Judge Cannon’s order is, and we'll have to see what comes of that. He may say he's taking the job but we're doing things his way or the highway, and his way might not be the same as Judge Loose.
Second, if he really is a Reagan Republican, and since he spent all those years in Noo Yawk City, there's a good chance he already despises Trump and has been too polite to say so in public. Nobody in Noo Yawk likes Trump. Ronald Reagan would have despised Trump. If there are sane Republicans left, maybe Judge Dearie is one of them.
It will be renamed to the "LOVE ME, DADDY!" PAC.Gregg wrote: ↑Mon Sep 19, 2022 12:39 am Actually, as soon as he declares the PAC money is absolutely off limits and he'll have to raise money for a separate fund to support a candidacy. About the only thing a PAC cannot do is have anything to do with specific candidate and he'll have to get someone else to run it for him. (sounds like a good job for a son with a coke problem who needs a job and will do what he's told)
Thanks, chancery. I am sticking with my fantasy, because I think the 11th Circuit is clearly accelerating the resolution of the Motion for Partial Stay, but if they didn't shorten the time to see a reply brief, I suspect they're planning to rule without one. Which makes me think they only gave Trump four days because they don't care what he says.chancery wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 7:12 pm Unless there's been something new, the 11th Circuit said nothing to alter FRAP 27(a)(4), which provides: “Any reply to a response must be filed within 7 days after service of the response." And while I too have fantasies about a circuit slap already being drafted for release on Tuesday at 2:00 pm (and a pony -- h/t Belle Waring & John Holbo), a reply brief can be crucial when you're dealing with lying bullshitters (both terms applicable here).
Absolutely, never miss a chance to bolster your case.In light of the order shortening Trump's response time from 10 days to four, I imagine that the government would be well advised to get its reply in by Wednesday morning at the latest, Tuesday night if possible.
That was my approach in civil cases, too also.Maybenaut wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 7:46 pm Sometimes it's easy to draft a reply brief (or at least the bones of one) before you know what you're replying to, and sometimes it's not. Sometimes I forego them, particularly if the only thing I can really say is '"Is too!" in response to the government's "Is not!"
Yes, the government seems to be 1) moving very quickly, and 2) doing a great job of writing, and 3) never missing a chance to submit additional information. After what I've seen in the past few weeks, I expect the government to file anything it can, as fast as it can, and what they file will be first class litigation. The stuff I've read thus far has been very, very enjoyable to read. These people are gladiators of the mind, which is what the best lawyers are.But I would expect a reply in this case. Trump's lawyers are going to parrot opinion of the district court judge, and that's really what the government has to attack anyway.
Oh boy.
My thought when I first read that statement from the shit gibbon was that the FBI should have worn Type A, fully encapsulated hazmat suits.