topcat
Well-Known Member
I view this as a 12-course meal that I'm just eyeing the appetizer. A long, delicious meal to savor.
Mar- A Lago raided FBI Warrants
- Thread starter hillbill
- Start date
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Judge Refuses to Allow Anti-Trump Former GOP Administration Officials to Weigh in on Special Master, But 'Appreciates' Their 'Willingness to Participate'
Six former federal prosecutors and a former GOP governor wanted to explain why they think filing a special master in the Mar-a-Lago warrant case is a bad idea.
Judge Refuses to Allow Anti-Trump Former GOP Administration Officials to Weigh in on Special Master, But ‘Appreciates’ Their ‘Willingness to Participate’
The federal judge who issued an unusual Labor Day ruling appointing a special master to review thousands of files seized from the 45th president’s Mar-a-Lago estate issued a brief order on Tuesday refusing to allow several onetime GOP officials from filing an amicus brief in opposition to the special master appointment.
In late August, several anti-Donald Trump former officials who served under Republican administrations moved to submit a “friend of the court” document that would help U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon sort through the various legal issues at stake in the unprecedented criminal inquiry into the former U.S. head of state.
Such efforts to shape and influence a court’s eventual decision on any given legal dispute are routine. In federal litigation, oftentimes well over a dozen such amici are allowed to share their legal arguments.
The would-be-amici here were former federal prosecutors Donald B. Ayer, Gregory A. Brower, John J. Farmer Jr., Stuart M. Gerson, Peter D. Keisler, William F. Weld, and twice-elected former New Jersey governor Christine Todd Whitman, a former Republican who is now technically a member of Andrew Yang’s centrist Forward Party.
Describing themselves, the example amicus brief filed last month says “all served in Republican administrations and collectively have decades of experience prosecuting cases involving sensitive materials or advising on matters regarding the proper scope of executive power and executive privilege.” The filing goes on to say that each has relevant expertise including “substantial personal experience with the structure and process of law enforcement investigations, including investigations involving public officials.”
In their proposed brief, the lawyers and Whitman argued that there was “no legal basis” to appoint a special master in the Trump case and, even if there was, that Trump had no basis to claim executive privilege over the documents seized from his residence by the FBI.
“Amici respectfully submit this brief in connection with former President Trump’s motion for the appointment of a special master to adjudicate his claims of executive privilege over documents seized by federal prosecutors pursuant to a duly-issued warrant,” the proposed brief argues. “[R]egardless of one’s political views, it is clear that there is no legal support for the relief requested by the former President.”
The filing goes on to say that appointing a special master “would be a waste of time” because Trump’s executive privilege claims are “manifestly frivolous,” citing “[c]ontrolling legal precedent.”
Cannon, in a paperless order with one sentence of explanation, dismissed the need for the ex-federal and state officials’ thoughts on the matter.
“Upon review of the Motion, the Court appreciates the movants’ willingness to participate in this matter but does not find the proposed appointment of amici curiae to be warranted,” the judge wrote.
Additionally, six other attorneys sought leave from the court in pro hac vice motions to formally take part in the case as the counsels-of-record for the seven anti-Trump prospective amici.
The Trump-appointed district judge denied those efforts as well.
“In light of the Court’s ruling on the Motion for Leave to File Brief as Amici Curiae,” Cannon wrote in another one-sentence-long order, “these Motions to Appear Pro Hac Vice are denied.”
Bagginski
Well-Known Member
“Loose” Cannon should be reprimanded: regardless of Chump’s lack of standing, SHE lacks standing to mess with a matter overseen in previous action by a senior judge with whom the matter already rests; this is another, now-‘classic’ end-run attempt by Trump to OVERRULE the magistrate presiding over the Mad El Gordo search warrant AND RELATED matters. For the sake of law and justice, she should be removed from the bench & face potential disbarment for this.
Her ‘order’ should be acknowledged as BEYOND HER AUTHORITY AND JURISDICTION, vacated with prejudice, and herself sanctioned & referred to the ABA for a violation of professional ethics. Beyond that, her *acceptance* of El Gordo’s filing & her attempt to enforce it is itself a significant ethical breach.
plantinggreen
Active Member
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Agreed and the senate judicary committee might want to speak to her, the house could also hold an impeachment inquiry, if they win in November. However the judicial branch might police itself in this case, she is WAY out of line here and is being humiliated on TV by legal experts daily. She is bringing the courts into ill repute and causing embarrassment.
I wonder how many death threats she is receiving compared to the judge who issued the warrant? I'll bet it's quite a ratio.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
I doubt she is receiving many death threats. That’s a Repug behavior, and she just handed them a big favor.
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
she's stepping in deep shit, and it's only going to get deeper...this is going to end up causing protests, that will escalate into violence, into riots...looks like mrs. lindseys was right, he just didn't know who it was going to be, rioting in the streetsJudge Refuses to Allow Anti-Trump Former GOP Administration Officials to Weigh in on Special Master, But 'Appreciates' Their 'Willingness to Participate'
Six former federal prosecutors and a former GOP governor wanted to explain why they think filing a special master in the Mar-a-Lago warrant case is a bad idea.lawandcrime.com
Judge Refuses to Allow Anti-Trump Former GOP Administration Officials to Weigh in on Special Master, But ‘Appreciates’ Their ‘Willingness to Participate’
The federal judge who issued an unusual Labor Day ruling appointing a special master to review thousands of files seized from the 45th president’s Mar-a-Lago estate issued a brief order on Tuesday refusing to allow several onetime GOP officials from filing an amicus brief in opposition to the special master appointment.
In late August, several anti-Donald Trump former officials who served under Republican administrations moved to submit a “friend of the court” document that would help U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon sort through the various legal issues at stake in the unprecedented criminal inquiry into the former U.S. head of state.
Such efforts to shape and influence a court’s eventual decision on any given legal dispute are routine. In federal litigation, oftentimes well over a dozen such amici are allowed to share their legal arguments.
The would-be-amici here were former federal prosecutors Donald B. Ayer, Gregory A. Brower, John J. Farmer Jr., Stuart M. Gerson, Peter D. Keisler, William F. Weld, and twice-elected former New Jersey governor Christine Todd Whitman, a former Republican who is now technically a member of Andrew Yang’s centrist Forward Party.
Describing themselves, the example amicus brief filed last month says “all served in Republican administrations and collectively have decades of experience prosecuting cases involving sensitive materials or advising on matters regarding the proper scope of executive power and executive privilege.” The filing goes on to say that each has relevant expertise including “substantial personal experience with the structure and process of law enforcement investigations, including investigations involving public officials.”
In their proposed brief, the lawyers and Whitman argued that there was “no legal basis” to appoint a special master in the Trump case and, even if there was, that Trump had no basis to claim executive privilege over the documents seized from his residence by the FBI.
“Amici respectfully submit this brief in connection with former President Trump’s motion for the appointment of a special master to adjudicate his claims of executive privilege over documents seized by federal prosecutors pursuant to a duly-issued warrant,” the proposed brief argues. “[R]egardless of one’s political views, it is clear that there is no legal support for the relief requested by the former President.”
The filing goes on to say that appointing a special master “would be a waste of time” because Trump’s executive privilege claims are “manifestly frivolous,” citing “[c]ontrolling legal precedent.”
Cannon, in a paperless order with one sentence of explanation, dismissed the need for the ex-federal and state officials’ thoughts on the matter.
“Upon review of the Motion, the Court appreciates the movants’ willingness to participate in this matter but does not find the proposed appointment of amici curiae to be warranted,” the judge wrote.
Additionally, six other attorneys sought leave from the court in pro hac vice motions to formally take part in the case as the counsels-of-record for the seven anti-Trump prospective amici.
The Trump-appointed district judge denied those efforts as well.
“In light of the Court’s ruling on the Motion for Leave to File Brief as Amici Curiae,” Cannon wrote in another one-sentence-long order, “these Motions to Appear Pro Hac Vice are denied.”
ANC
Well-Known Member
if not death threats, then angry pieces of mind.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
hanimmal
Well-Known Member
I wouldn’t doubt she is getting them. It’s basically the same logic as a left troll sock puppet, doesnt make them real, but wouldn’t stop them from being used by right wing propagandists as a “whataboutism”.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Oh. That is quite plausible, and in line with maga tactics.
plantinggreen
Active Member
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
I think Garland could wait awhile before appealing, he will see who and how long it takes the special master to finish, it should not be long at all. Meanwhile he might file more briefs with this judge and include much of the text of this brief plus lot's of other photos and juicy details to screw over Trump even more in public. She is taking one Helluva pounding and the original judge should step in for questioning his judgement and stepping into his case, thereby obstructing justice for no justifiable cause. Judges can be indicted for obstruction of justice too and if he gives her enough rope, she might just hang herself.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Is there precedent for the bolded?
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Garland is a judge, a real one and this dumb bitch must be burning his ass and has been noticed. I wonder what her phone records would reveal? Who was she talking to, who was calling and texting her leading up to this and since?
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Not sure, but this is an unprecedented situation, so new law might have to be made from the bench! There might be a point, if not there already, where she is obstructing justice by abusing her office.