Fogbow

Slim Cognito wrote: ↑Fri Nov 03, 2023 1:51 pm Did she also order them to use smaller words?

andersweinstein wrote: ↑Fri Nov 03, 2023 1:29 pm

raison de arizona wrote: ↑Thu Nov 02, 2023 3:59 pm

Roger Parloff @rparloff wrote: After Trump asked Judge Cannon to delay FL trial yesterday because of DC trial, he moved to stay DC trial. Govt now shows Cannon his motion saying it confirms "his overriding interest in delaying both trials at any cost." Asks her not to be "manipulated in this fashion."

Seems to have made Cannon a bit testy:

Greatgrey wrote: ↑Fri Nov 03, 2023 7:23 pm It was 219 words.

andersweinstein wrote: ↑Fri Nov 03, 2023 1:29 pm Seems to have made Cannon a bit testy:

https://twitter.com/joshgerstein/status ... 81997?s=20

A plumber, a maid, a chauffeur and a woodworker are among Mar-a-Lago staffers and contract workers who federal prosecutors may call to testify against former President Donald Trump and his two co-defendants at their upcoming criminal trial in Florida, according to multiple people familiar with the investigation.

CNN has assembled a comprehensive picture of how prosecutors are structuring their case against Trump over his mishandling of classified documents found at Mar-a-Lago.

While some of the witnesses who may be called to testify hail from Trump’s inner circle, including his career in business, as a political candidate and from his time in the White House, other potential witnesses are the types of workers rarely noticed by Mar-a-Lago’s wealthy guests, according to the sources.

Other likely witnesses also include Trump Secret Service agents, former intelligence officials, as well as people who were in the room with Trump when he was captured on multiple audio recordings referencing a military document about potential plans to bomb Iran, according to the sources.

But the low-level workers who were the eyes and ears of Mar-a-Lago, if called to testify, could offer the public a new level of insight into the exclusive club and Trump’s approach to sensitive national security information since he left office. Some of them are still employed at Mar-a-Lago.

New book details Trump lawyers’ secret meeting with Jack Smith ahead of DC indictment
ABC’s Jonathan Karl offers an account of a fateful July 27 meeting in his forthcoming book.

By KYLE CHENEY
11/13/2023 05:00 AM EST

Jack Smith’s public image, shaped by his near invisibility since taking over the federal criminal cases against Donald Trump, has been that of a sullen, brooding and hard-charging prosecutor.

His steely glare, on display in two arraignments of the former president and in a handful of public photos and videos, has contributed to a sort of mythology around the veteran corruption prosecutor.

ABC’s Jonathan Karl offers an account of the fateful July 27 meeting in his forthcoming book, “Tired of Winning,” that suggests Smith took the same wordless, unsmiling approach to Trump’s attorneys that he’s presented in his few public appearances.

Smith, joined by deputies J.P. Cooney and Ray Hulser — both veteran public corruption prosecutors — greeted Trump attorneys Todd Blanche and John Lauro, who had started on the job less than two weeks earlier.

“After some short pleasantries, Smith invited the Trump lawyers to sit at the conference table and offered them some water to drink,” Karl writes.

Lauro quickly launched into a lengthy presentation, making the case that Smith should forgo charges against Trump related to his bid to subvert the 2020 election.

Sitting across the table from Smith and his prosecutors, Lauro spoke virtually uninterrupted for nearly an hour, Karl writes.

Lauro’s presentation featured a now-familiar case — that Trump genuinely believed he won the election and was exercising his First Amendment right to challenge it and raise questions; that Trump was following the advice of his lawyers; and that he had already faced impeachment and an extensive congressional investigation over the matter. Indicting him would just inflame a divided country further, Lauro said, according to Karl’s account.

“As Lauro spoke, the prosecutors took notes, but they said nothing. Smith waited until Lauro was done speaking and then, without commenting on what he just heard, he bid the Trump lawyers farewell,” Karl writes. “According to sources with direct knowledge of the meeting, Smith did not ask a single question. And aside from the pleasantries at the start of the meeting (including the offer of a glass of water) and the goodbye at the end, neither Smith nor the two prosecutors said anything at all.”




https://www.politico.com/news/2023/11/1 ... h-00126681

Slim Cognito wrote: ↑Tue Nov 14, 2023 4:07 pm Oh, he's goooooood.

Suranis wrote: ↑Tue Nov 14, 2023 10:48 pmzod.jpg

chancery wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 12:48 pm Meh. Trump's lawyers had requested "either earlier in the week of February 12 or the prior week." They also informed court that "[t]he Special Counsel’s Office informed us they prefer dates earlier in the week of February 12, 2024."

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... .216.0.pdf

Judge Cannon selected the later of the two weeks proposed by Trump's lawyers, and chose the first day of the week as the Special Counsel had requested.

This is in fact the way routine litigation housekeeping is supposed to work: the court and counsel make reasonable accommodation for scheduling problems, and counsel exchange information so that the issue can be presented efficiently to the court in a single document.

Andrew Weissmann (weissmann11 on Threads)
@AWeissmann_

Breaking: Judge Cannon’s bias is showing over and over again. Smith has to be weighing whether, when, and how to seek her reversal by the Ct of Appeals and her removal.

Hugo Lowell
@hugolowell
NEW: Judge Cannon denies request by Special Counsel that she set CIPA Section 5 deadline in Trump classified docs case -- where defendant is required to disclose what classified info he intends to use at trial -- and says it will be set in March 2024 (!)

Andrew Weissmann (weissmann11 on Threads)
@AWeissmann_
Not scheduling a CIPA section 5 hearing, which is routine, is a clear sign she is just as much in the bag for Trump as when she issued her horrendous pretrial rulings (both reversed in scathing language by the conservative 11th Circuit). What a piece of work is she.

Slim Cognito wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 3:03 pm What's likely to be next? Appeal to the 11th in hopes they order her to set a date? What if she sets it for spring 2024? I haz questions.

chancery wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 4:47 pmNow, the CIPA statute does provide for interlocutory appeals, so that takes care of the procedural issue, but it's still almost impossible to challenge a scheduling order. I don't know nothing about CIPA, let alone the ultra-specialized issue of CIPA interlocutory appeals, but I _suspect_ that the government wouldn't get any traction with an appeal that doesn't involve inappropriate disclosure of highly sensitive classified information.

bob wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 4:53 pm "People are saying," if the prosecutor is willing to accept delay, this may be the best path to ask the 11th to boot Cannon from this case.

chancery wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 5:13 pm

bob wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 4:53 pm "People are saying," if the prosecutor is willing to accept delay, this may be the best path to ask the 11th to boot Cannon from this case.

Not sure I follow. Do you mean an appeal concerning a Cannon ruling about classified information?

bob wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 5:15 pm

chancery wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 5:13 pm

bob wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 4:53 pm "People are saying," if the prosecutor is willing to accept delay, this may be the best path to ask the 11th to boot Cannon from this case.

Not sure I follow. Do you mean an appeal concerning a Cannon ruling about classified information?

Yeah: "People are saying" that, in addition to asking for an appropriate ruling on the classified-information hearing, the prosecutor should also ask the 11th to reassign this case to a different judge.

chancery wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 5:27 pm Well, as far as I know, there hasn't been a substantive decision yet on disclosure of classified information, although I guess she's given an indication that she might order wholesale disclosure of classified information to Nauta and Oliveira, which strikes me as whacko.