Trump files demand to review his documents seized in Cohen raid

There's something poetic about Trump essentially being brought down by a porn star
 
I'm sorry officer, but I think I should be able to go through my glove box first and decide what shouldn't be subject to search and seizure.
 
She argued that U.S. prosecutors had made clear in their filings before the court that they’ve “pre-judged the matter of privilege” by insisting that few of the documents seized were likely to warrant that protection, and that the “staggering amount of attention trained on this investigation, Mr. Cohen, and the President” make it impossible for them to review the material fairly.
I like this part, especially the bold. It's right up there with the claim of the president being incapable of obstructing justice because he's the highest authority in the US (paraphrasing). It always amounts to some inane argument as to why Trump and his associates shouldn't be accountable for their behavior.
 
Claims no DOJ team would be able to sort through the evidence fairly so he should do it.

Wish i got to review my own evidence before it was sorted through.
 
<36>




https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...s-seized-in-raids-on-michael-cohen/ar-AAvVsuf


My favorite part is the "aggressive, intrusive, and unorthodox manner" that is "disquieting to lawyers, clients, citizens, and commentators alike."

These fucking guys. Strangely, since the agency did everything pretty clearly by the book, I haven't seen any lawyers groups or citizens rights groups express that outrage. I must not be paying attention to the real newz.

The DOJ needs to come up with something better than “taint team.”

Also, I think the best that Trump can hope for is a Special Master.
 
Is it commonplace in the USA to let the "suspect" decide which documents fall under the attorney-client privilege?
"Making the rules up as we go along" is a pretty good way to look at this administration... and the USA as a whole imo.

There are no rules. Just privileged people who tell us what we can and cant do.
 
What's precedent here if the case did not involve a sitting president?

If files from a lawyer about a case you were on were seized, would you get a chance to review (not tamper or block) and see for yourself what documents were seized?
 
I agree

Due process does not include trying to interrupt and preempt a criminal investigation.

He'll get his chance: if they file charges.

This response would be completely the opposite if it would be someone you supported requested this. Any actual lawyer would request this on behalf of their client showing once again what a biased fraud you are.
 
This response would be completely the opposite if it would be someone you supported requested this. Any actual lawyer would request this on behalf of their client showing once again what a biased fraud you are.
Question: would such an action usually be accompanied by a full scale assault on the reputation of law enforcement agencies?
 
This response would be completely the opposite if it would be someone you supported requested this. Any actual lawyer would request this on behalf of their client showing once again what a biased fraud you are.

Due process is due process, you moron. No, I would not define it differently for a different person. Suspects in ongoing investigations are never allowed to access materials related to them to try and preempt the investigation.

"Any actual lawyer" would do that if/when their client is paying them premium fees to try every last desperate thing to try and stop up the process.

lol @ you thinking this was the independent legal judgment of his counsel. No, no "actual lawyer" would recommend this course of conduct, since it is objectively without merit and a complete waste of time.
 
Considering how many scumbag leakers there are, I’d be very concerned if years of my privileged info fell into their hands

Rationalize, project, minimize --the three things guilty parties tend to do.

Muddy the waters. Make the conduct of the press the issue. Deflect from legitimate questions about your own conduct and make the conduct of everyone else more important than your own. Attack the law and those who enforce it.

This response would be completely the opposite if it would be someone you supported requested this. Any actual lawyer would request this on behalf of their client showing once again what a biased fraud you are.

Rationalize, project, minimize --the three things guilty parties tend to do.

Muddy the waters. Make the conduct of the press the issue. Deflect from legitimate questions about your own conduct and make the conduct of everyone else more important than your own. Attack the law and those who enforce it.

Any more trolls wish to display completely predictable behavior?
 
Guess we’ll find out when Judge Wood (heh) renders her decision today. Could be interesting. If she sides with Trump and Cohen that the warrant was basically an overreach and they took things they shouldn’t have I could see that turning into the axe falling on Rosenstein for signing off on the warrant.
 
Last edited:
a-friend-told-me-she-was-making-sugar-free-guilt-free-chocolate-this-was-my-response-27230.png
 
Meh, I suspect this will be another round of nothing. Honestly, what does everyone think is in those files? I'm sure his lawyer isn't dumb.
 
Back
Top