US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

Abandon reality, all ye who enter here. *Democracy*Under*Threat*

Will this case go to trial before the primary elections?

Yes, and it will be a wonderful circus
29
23%
No, Judge Cannon will dismiss the case on a motion to dismiss
6
5%
No, Trump’s attorneys will work out a plea bargain
2
2%
No, the case will be in the appeals court through the 2024 election
24
19%
No, Judge Cannon will grant numerous motions to delay the case
36
29%
No, this case will NEVER go to trial, but I don't know what will happen
10
8%
Some other option, which I will describe in a post.
4
3%
Debilitating brain aneurysm
13
10%
 
Total votes: 124

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 15940
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#551

Post by RTH10260 »

B (3) -[c]

When possible, T-SCIFs shall be established within the perimeters of U.S.-controlled areas or compounds.
His personal Secret Servic body guards will not qualify to control the perimeter. Also too note the attempt to grift: he would lease them the space for the temporary SCIF at current rates for dropin guests, and he will be delighted to rent out a floor of rooms to the agents that need to keep an eye on the facility and prevent those foreign dignitaries from taking a peek at the wonders of the US government.
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 15940
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#552

Post by RTH10260 »

FWIW


User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 4043
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:48 am

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#553

Post by RVInit »

I have a feeling Cannon will allow him to do it. When she interfered with the case before the 11th Circuit tried to teach her a lesson she was seriously questioning whether any of the documents was classified. She clearly buys into anything Trump says. She a scary one. I'm betting Smith will end up having to appeal this one.
“A know-it-all is a person who knows everything except for how annoying he is.”

— Demetri Martin
User avatar
Slim Cognito
Posts: 6960
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:15 am
Location: Too close to trump
Occupation: Hats. I do hats.
Verified:

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#554

Post by Slim Cognito »

I will not bet against you.
My Crested Yorkie, Gilda and her amazing hair.


ImageImageImage x4
chancery
Posts: 1689
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:24 pm
Verified:

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#555

Post by chancery »

https://twitter.com/emptywheel/status/1 ... 0915679233
emptywheel
@emptywheel
There was some suggestion that Aileen Cannon raised Qs abt two grand juries bc of what she saw on TV. But Woodward pushed it hard on July 18 (and Trump's lawyers did too).

Marcy Wheeler/emptywheel often shows remarkably poor judgment in interpreting developments in prosecutions, and she's stubborn when called out. Nonetheless, she is indefatigable in plowing through transcripts and filings. This is a good catch.

As a twitter user commented:
https://twitter.com/richsin603/status/1 ... 8905339904
Thank you! Cannon has many flaws but it doesn't help for people to travel down the rabbit holes of conspiracies like "she got that from Fox News." Maybe she did. But we'll never know. It's better to stay focused on demonstrable matters, like how she rules on the insane SCIF thing.
The issue of multiple grand juries enigmatically raised by Cannon does appear to be nuts, and she may be planning to use the issue in bad faith in an effort to to gralloch the prosecution, but we should abandon the notion that the only place she could have picked up the idea was on Fox News.
chancery
Posts: 1689
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:24 pm
Verified:

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#556

Post by chancery »

https://twitter.com/hugolowell/status/1 ... 3340700674
Hugo Lowell
@hugolowell
New: Special Counsel sharply objects to Trump suggestion to have a SCIF at Mar-a-Lago: “No need to modify the proposed protective order… much less to include in the order approval to "re-establish” a secure area at an unidentified location used during Trump's presidency.”

Special Counsel: “Govt’s proposed protective order reflects standard procedures for handling classified information in criminal cases. Defendant Trump’s opposition seeks special treatment that no other criminal defendant would receive and that is unsupported by law or precedent.”
It's a good brief. Read it here: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... 20.0_1.pdf
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 15940
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#557

Post by RTH10260 »

Ben Meiselas comments on the resubmission of the protective order, eg no separate SCIF at MaL, official one in Miami good enough, no special privileges for this criminal defendant. Meiselas believes wording carefully crafted for appeal if denied, and get the judge possibly removed from case.

(please skip the matress promotion embedded)

User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 6413
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:25 pm

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#558

Post by Suranis »

Key witness in Maralago case (employee 4) changed lawyers, is now flipping on Trump.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... .129.0.pdf
Hic sunt dracones
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 15940
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#559

Post by RTH10260 »

new lawyer is public defender and no longer one financed thru the former guy
Prosecutors: Trump Mar-a-Lago security aide flipped after changing lawyers
Special counsel Jack Smith’s team revealed the details of the employee’s about-face in a new filing.

By KYLE CHENEY and JOSH GERSTEIN
08/22/2023 06:01 PM EDT Updated: 08/22/2023 06:32 PM EDT

A Trump employee who monitored security cameras at Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate abruptly retracted his earlier grand jury testimony and implicated Trump and others in obstruction of justice just after switching from an attorney paid for by a Trump political action committee to a lawyer from the federal defender’s office in Washington, prosecutors said in a court filing Tuesday.

The aide — described as “Trump Employee 4” in public court filings but identified elsewhere as Yuscil Taveras — held the title of director of information technology at Mar-a-Lago. He initially testified to a grand jury in Washington, D.C., that he was unaware of any effort to erase the videos, but after getting the new attorney “immediately … retracted his prior false testimony” and detailed the alleged effort to tamper with evidence related to the investigation of the handling of classified information stored at Trump’s Florida home, the new submission said.

Special counsel Jack Smith’s team revealed the details of the employee’s about-face as part of a filing demanded by Florida-based U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon, who is overseeing the classified records case against the former president.



https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/2 ... h-00112355
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 15940
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#560

Post by RTH10260 »

Note: Cannot find reference yet(*), but it seems Jack Smith filed a motion for the court (Cannon) to evaluate if one of T financed lawyers may represent multiple defendants without conflict.

(*) except this source clip
► Show Spoiler
User avatar
Luke
Posts: 5825
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:21 pm
Location: @orly_licious With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#561

Post by Luke »

If Carlos De Oliveira needs a GREAT lawyer, Fogbow has one of it's favorite attorneys right in Fort Lauderdale...

INGER GARCIA!

Inger did such a tremendous and fantastic job for Terry Trussell, Grand Jury Foreman Extraordinaire. Who can forget her brilliant motion practice. Realist, did you stay in touch with Inger after Trussell's trial? :P

http://www.ccfj.net/condolawyerIG1.html
Lt Root Beer of the Mighty 699th. Fogbow 💙s titular Mama June in Fogbow's Favourite Show™ Mama June: From Not To Hot! Fogbow's Theme Song™ Edith Massey's "I Got The Evidence!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5jDHZd0JAg
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 15940
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#562

Post by RTH10260 »

User avatar
Sam the Centipede
Posts: 2098
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2021 12:19 pm

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#563

Post by Sam the Centipede »

Off Topic
"First Assistant Federal Defender" (the guy now representing the "and which of your contradictory sworn testimonies are you asserting to be true now?" Trump Employee 4) - isn't that a Star Trekky sort of job title?

It would fit a cold-eyed pyschopath in a suit with a big silver collar and a silver helmet who is determined to become not just Assistant Federal Defender but, by fair means or foul … no, only by foul means, Chief Federal Defender, the Guardian of the Golden McGuffin. Of course, ulimately the FAFD is thwarted, as must always be, and the Golden McGuffin is safe, phew!
somerset
Posts: 788
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:06 pm
Occupation: Lab Rat

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#564

Post by somerset »

RTH10260 wrote: Wed Aug 23, 2023 7:01 am Note: Cannot find reference yet(*), but it seems Jack Smith filed a motion for the court (Cannon) to evaluate if one of T financed lawyers my represent multiple defendants without conflict.

(*) except this source clip
► Show Spoiler
It's in the filing linked by the Mousie guy above.
REPLY IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF GOVERNMENT’S
MOTION FOR GARCIA HEARING


II. A Garcia Hearing Is Required
Where, as here, an attorney “has previously represented a person who will be called as a
witness against a current client at a criminal trial” in a substantially related matter, that attorney
“has an actual conflict of interest.” United States v. Ross, 33 F.3d 1507, 1523 (11th Cir. 1994). A
scenario that “presents defense counsel with the impossible dilemma of cross-examining one
former client to benefit another current client . . . is wrought with conflicts.” United States v. Braun,
No. 19-80030-CR, 2019 WL 1893113, at *6 (S.D. Fla. Apr. 29, 2019); accord United States v.
Schneider, 322 F. Supp. 3d 1294, 1297 (S.D. Fla. 2018), aff’d, 853 F. App’x 463 (11th Cir. 2021).
When the Government intends to call defense counsel’s prior client as a witness against the
defendant, and “vigorous cross-examination” of that witness is required, defense counsel’s “prior
representation” of the witness renders him “unable ethically to provide that cross-examination.”
Wheat v. United States, 486 U.S. 153, 164 (1988).2
Thus, Mr. Woodward’s successive
representation of Nauta and Trump Employee 4 squarely implicates his ethical obligations. Even
if Mr. Woodward was “unaware” (ECF No. 126 at 4) at the time he represented Trump Employee
4 that his client might give testimony that would incriminate Nauta, he is certainly aware now.
User avatar
realist
Posts: 1236
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:25 am

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#565

Post by realist »

orlylicious wrote: Wed Aug 23, 2023 7:13 am If Carlos De Oliveira needs a GREAT lawyer, Fogbow has one of it's favorite attorneys right in Fort Lauderdale...

INGER GARCIA!

Inger did such a tremendous and fantastic job for Terry Trussell, Grand Jury Foreman Extraordinaire. Who can forget her brilliant motion practice. Realist, did you stay in touch with Inger after Trussell's trial? :P

http://www.ccfj.net/condolawyerIG1.html
You apparently don't get it, Orly. That is why Smith is calling for a "GARCIA" hearing. :whistle:
Hidden Content
This board requires you to be registered and logged-in to view hidden content.
Image
Image X 4
Image X 32
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 15940
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#566

Post by RTH10260 »

Michael Popok reports on Jack Smiths reply to the loose cannon re multiple grand juries

User avatar
Kendra
Posts: 10803
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:17 am

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#567

Post by Kendra »

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/mo ... 6ef2&ei=14
It appears that a few more of the witnesses involved in the Mar-a-Lago document scandal have abandoned lawyer John Irving, who is being paid for by Donald Trump.

Just a few weeks ago it was revealed in a Justice Department filing that IT supervisor Yuscil Taveras found another attorney outside of Trump world attorney Stanley Woodward, and was beginning to set the record straight after giving false testimony to the grand jury. Now, it appears that in another filing for witness Carlos De Oliveira, lawyer John Irving revealed others are abandoning his services as well.

Page 2 of the filing says: "Further, undersigned counsel no longer represents those three individuals, and new independent counsel is being made available to advise them going forward."

It's unclear if these individuals have turned on Trump, however.
Legal analyst Allison Gill shared the filing Sunday, explaining that special counsel Jack Smith had filed a request for a conflict of interest hearing. Irving is opposing it, but the filing reveals a lot about what's happening behind the scenes.

"The Government does not assert that any actual conflict of interest exists between Mr. De Oliveira and the three potential witnesses that it might call at a trial that currently is scheduled to proceed nearly nine months from now, nor does it 'seek a specific remedy' from the Court," Irving wrote in the filing.
User avatar
Foggy
Dick Tater
Posts: 10228
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:45 am
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater/Space Cadet
Verified: Inventor of flag baseball

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#568

Post by Foggy »

Popcorn. Moar popcorn. :popcorn:
You are what you eat.
Last night I was a chicken quesadilla.
User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 4043
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:48 am

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#569

Post by RVInit »

Some of those Mar-a-Lago employees may be watching real news and hearing one after another after another lawyer talk about how every person in that orbit needs to have their own independent counsel who will advise them on what is in their best interest. That has to make you take a deep breath and start thinking when you are hearing this kind of advise all over the place. Some of those people must be at least smart enough to figure out that any lawyer paid by Trump or Trump PAC would be more interested in Trump's behind than theirs.
“A know-it-all is a person who knows everything except for how annoying he is.”

— Demetri Martin
NewMexGirl
Posts: 386
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2021 2:03 am

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#570

Post by NewMexGirl »

RVInit wrote: Tue Sep 05, 2023 10:00 am Some of those Mar-a-Lago employees may be watching real news and hearing one after another after another lawyer talk about how every person in that orbit needs to have their own independent counsel who will advise them on what is in their best interest. That has to make you take a deep breath and start thinking when you are hearing this kind of advise all over the place. Some of those people must be at least smart enough to figure out that any lawyer paid by Trump or Trump PAC would be more interested in Trump's behind than theirs.
An issue that might arise is that some employees may not be able to afford a different attorney and aren’t eligible to have a Fed public defender allotted to them. Rock and a hard place…
User avatar
Kendra
Posts: 10803
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:17 am

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#571

Post by Kendra »

https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/06/politics ... index.html

Mar-a-Lago IT worker Yuscil Taveras has struck a cooperation agreement with the special counsel’s office in the federal case over former President Donald Trump’s handling of classified documents, Taveras’ former defense attorney said in a new court filing.

Taveras struck the deal with prosecutors after he was threatened with prosecution, defense attorney Stanley Woodward wrote in the filing dated Tuesday.

Taveras is referred to in the filing and in the superseding indictment as “Trump Employee 4,” and CNN has identified him as that employee.

According to the terms of the deal explained in the filing, Taveras agreed to testify in the classified documents case and in exchange will not be prosecuted. He has not been charged with any crimes.

The filing marks the first public acknowledgment that special counsel Jack Smith has won the cooperation of key witnesses as part of his prosecution of Trump, his longtime valet Walt Nauta and Mar-a-Lago property manager Carlos de Oliveira.
User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 4043
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:48 am

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#572

Post by RVInit »

NewMexGirl wrote: Tue Sep 05, 2023 12:23 pm
RVInit wrote: Tue Sep 05, 2023 10:00 am Some of those Mar-a-Lago employees may be watching real news and hearing one after another after another lawyer talk about how every person in that orbit needs to have their own independent counsel who will advise them on what is in their best interest. That has to make you take a deep breath and start thinking when you are hearing this kind of advise all over the place. Some of those people must be at least smart enough to figure out that any lawyer paid by Trump or Trump PAC would be more interested in Trump's behind than theirs.
An issue that might arise is that some employees may not be able to afford a different attorney and aren’t eligible to have a Fed public defender allotted to them. Rock and a hard place…
I'm sure you are right about that. I was just commenting about the ones that apparently have found their own independent lawyers, assuming it's actually true that some of them have obtained independent counsel. I'm sure many of them can't afford it though, and probably will stick with the lawyers that are giving them the advice that's in Trump's best interest.

As to Oliviera, I hope someone gets through to him and maybe helps him get his own counsel. He apparently worked at Mar-a-Lago as a valet. All the sudden when Trump needs his assistance he gets promoted from valet to a management position. That is quite the promotion and obviously meant to make it difficult for Mr Oliviera to go against Trump. Another type of rock and a hard place.
“A know-it-all is a person who knows everything except for how annoying he is.”

— Demetri Martin
User avatar
Dr. Ken
Posts: 2736
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:12 pm
Contact:

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#573

Post by Dr. Ken »



ImageImagePhilly Boondoggle
User avatar
raison de arizona
Posts: 20219
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
Location: Nothing, Arizona
Occupation: bit twiddler
Verified: ✔️ he/him/his

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#574

Post by raison de arizona »

Well, it appears he received decent legal advice. Shame he didn't take it.
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” —John Adams
User avatar
AndyinPA
Posts: 10333
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:42 am
Location: Pittsburgh
Verified:

US v. Trump - Espionage Act - (9:23-cr-80101) District Court, S.D. Florida

#575

Post by AndyinPA »

That's why I think he will one day take the stand in at least one of his cases.
"Choose your leaders with wisdom and forethought. To be led by a coward is to be controlled by all that the coward fears… To be led by a liar is to ask to be told lies." -Octavia E. Butler
Post Reply

Return to “The Big Lie & Aftermath of The Former Guy”