I AM IRONMAN Posted December 1, 2022 Report Share Posted December 1, 2022 26 minutes ago, DBP66 said: Nothing to see here Ironman and Warrior....it's all "fake" news!...🤡...🤡 Criminal tax fraud trial of 2 Trump companies coming to a close after emotional testimony by ex-CFO Kevin McCoy, USA TODAY Thu, December 1, 2022 at 5:00 AM NEW YORK - Defense lawyers for two of former President Donald Trump's companies and Manhattan prosecutors are scheduled to make closing arguments Thursday as a criminal tax fraud trial involving the companies winds toward a close. Summing up just over a month of trial testimony and evidence, the opposing legal teams will try to convince the eight-man, four-woman jury that what they heard and saw justifies either a conviction or acquittal. A guilty finding could hit the companies with up to an estimated $1.6 million in criminal penalties and tar the reputation of Trump's namesake firms with a criminal conviction. The case arises from a July 2021 indictment that accused longtime Trump financial lieutenant Allen Weisselberg, the Trump Corporation and the Trump Payroll Corporation of participating in a more than decade-long tax fraud scheme that benefited top executives while producing financial benefits for the companies. Weisselberg is no longer CFO of the Trump Organization, though he is still employed by the Trump business empire. - ADVERTISEMENT - The alleged crimes included untaxed perks that enabled Weisselberg and other top Trump executives to get company-paid Manhattan apartments and luxury cars, which they did not report as income. They also received thousands of dollars in tax-free payments. Allen Weisselberg stands between President-elect Donald Trump and Donald Trump Jr. in the lobby of Trump Tower in New York on Jan. 11, 2017. Trump was not charged in the case, and did not appear in court during the trial. However, he criticized the prosecution in a Thanksgiving week posting on Truth Social. The end of the trial comes just weeks after Trump announced he is running for president again in 2024 and amid a flurry of other recent developments in civil and criminal matters involving Trump. Weisselberg pleaded guilty in August to all 15 charges against him as part of an agreement with prosecutors. He admitted he concealed $1.76 million in income through the alleged scheme. The deal is expected to enable Weisselberg to serve roughly 100 days in jail, far less than the maximum 15-year prison term he could have faced. That made Weisselberg the trial's focal point. He was the star witness for the Manhattan District Attorney's Office. And he was the chief target of attack for the Trump companies' legal teams. Weisselberg, 75, helped both sides score points. Former CFO Allen Weisselberg leaves the courtroom for a lunch recess during a trial at the New York Supreme Court on November 17, 2022 in New York City. Still receiving his six-figure salary on a paid leave from the Trump Organization, he testified under cross-examination by defense lawyers that he'd acted out of his own greed, seeking pre-tax dollars. The defense characterized his conduct as a Weisselberg plot that was hidden from the companies. In one of the trial's most dramatic moments, defense lawyer Alan Futerfas noted that Weisselberg had worked for the Trump family for nearly 50 years, becoming the most trusted person in the organization who lacked the Trump surname. "Mr. Weisselberg, did you honor the trust that was placed in you?" asked Futerfas. Weisselberg admitted he had not. "And you did it for your own personal gain?" asked the defense lawyer. "I did," said Weisselberg, who appeared to fight back tears. However, during direct examination by prosecutor Susan Hoffinger, Weisselberg acknowledged that the companies had received some benefit from the alleged tax scheme. Reducing his salary to cover some tax-free perks paid by the company benefited him - but also produced lower payroll costs, as well as savings in the Medicare portion of payroll taxes that are paid by employers, Weisselberg testified. A New York state law that defines when corporations are deemed to have committed crimes is central to the case. Part of the law says corporations may be liable if the alleged criminal conduct was "engaged in ... by a high managerial agent acting within the scope of his employment and in behalf of the corporation." Both sides re-debated the meaning of "in benefit of" during a Tuesday conference about the legal instructions that Acting Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan is scheduled to deliver to the jury on Monday. During that session, without jurors present, the trial judge noted that a defense team review of archived state legislative material appeared to leave the precise meaning unclear. Merchan ultimately gave something to both sides. He said prosecutors would need to show jurors there had been "some intent to benefit" the corporations. But defense attorneys "can't overstate what that intent was," added Merchan. The jury will also have to decide other issues. For example, Weisselberg pleaded guilty to a scheme to defraud. But who was his co-schemer? That could be Jeffrey McConney, the Trump Organization controller, whose testimony also gave both sides some of what they wanted. Testifying under a grant of immunity from prosecution, McConney admitted he knew the tax-ducking tactics he carried out were illegal. However, McConney also testified that he simply followed instructions from Weisselberg, who was his boss, and said he didn't alert other company officials. Trump Organization senior vice president and controller Jeffrey McConney returns to the courthouse after a break in the company's trial, Tuesday, Nov. 1, 2022, in New York. The legal teams also battled during the trial over what blame for the alleged crimes, if any, should be assigned to Mazars, an international audit, tax and advisory firm that previously held the lucrative account for the dozens of Trump businesses. Defense lawyers pointed to language in the Mazars engagement letter that seemed to indicate the company would flag potential illegal conduct. Prosecutors cited other written language that said the Trump companies were responsible for providing accurate financial information to Mazars. Donald Bender, a Mazars partner formerly in charge of the Trump account, testified that the company didn't spot some of the alleged tax-evasion tactics. He said he had been fooled by Weisselberg, whom he had known for many years. He testified that he was sure he'd never seen Trump Corporation spreadsheets that showed how the company gave Weisselberg and other top executives extra payments by distributing the funds as if the recipients were independent contractors. Why? "Because I probably would have had a heart attack," said Bender. Soon to be 0-201😂 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
concha Posted December 1, 2022 Report Share Posted December 1, 2022 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warrior Posted December 1, 2022 Report Share Posted December 1, 2022 1 hour ago, DBP66 said: Nothing to see here Ironman and Warrior....it's all "fake" news!...🤡...🤡 Criminal tax fraud trial of 2 Trump companies coming to a close after emotional testimony by ex-CFO Kevin McCoy, USA TODAY Thu, December 1, 2022 at 5:00 AM NEW YORK - Defense lawyers for two of former President Donald Trump's companies and Manhattan prosecutors are scheduled to make closing arguments Thursday as a criminal tax fraud trial involving the companies winds toward a close. Summing up just over a month of trial testimony and evidence, the opposing legal teams will try to convince the eight-man, four-woman jury that what they heard and saw justifies either a conviction or acquittal. A guilty finding could hit the companies with up to an estimated $1.6 million in criminal penalties and tar the reputation of Trump's namesake firms with a criminal conviction. The case arises from a July 2021 indictment that accused longtime Trump financial lieutenant Allen Weisselberg, the Trump Corporation and the Trump Payroll Corporation of participating in a more than decade-long tax fraud scheme that benefited top executives while producing financial benefits for the companies. Weisselberg is no longer CFO of the Trump Organization, though he is still employed by the Trump business empire. - ADVERTISEMENT - The alleged crimes included untaxed perks that enabled Weisselberg and other top Trump executives to get company-paid Manhattan apartments and luxury cars, which they did not report as income. They also received thousands of dollars in tax-free payments. Allen Weisselberg stands between President-elect Donald Trump and Donald Trump Jr. in the lobby of Trump Tower in New York on Jan. 11, 2017. Trump was not charged in the case, and did not appear in court during the trial. However, he criticized the prosecution in a Thanksgiving week posting on Truth Social. The end of the trial comes just weeks after Trump announced he is running for president again in 2024 and amid a flurry of other recent developments in civil and criminal matters involving Trump. Weisselberg pleaded guilty in August to all 15 charges against him as part of an agreement with prosecutors. He admitted he concealed $1.76 million in income through the alleged scheme. The deal is expected to enable Weisselberg to serve roughly 100 days in jail, far less than the maximum 15-year prison term he could have faced. That made Weisselberg the trial's focal point. He was the star witness for the Manhattan District Attorney's Office. And he was the chief target of attack for the Trump companies' legal teams. Weisselberg, 75, helped both sides score points. Former CFO Allen Weisselberg leaves the courtroom for a lunch recess during a trial at the New York Supreme Court on November 17, 2022 in New York City. Still receiving his six-figure salary on a paid leave from the Trump Organization, he testified under cross-examination by defense lawyers that he'd acted out of his own greed, seeking pre-tax dollars. The defense characterized his conduct as a Weisselberg plot that was hidden from the companies. In one of the trial's most dramatic moments, defense lawyer Alan Futerfas noted that Weisselberg had worked for the Trump family for nearly 50 years, becoming the most trusted person in the organization who lacked the Trump surname. "Mr. Weisselberg, did you honor the trust that was placed in you?" asked Futerfas. Weisselberg admitted he had not. "And you did it for your own personal gain?" asked the defense lawyer. "I did," said Weisselberg, who appeared to fight back tears. However, during direct examination by prosecutor Susan Hoffinger, Weisselberg acknowledged that the companies had received some benefit from the alleged tax scheme. Reducing his salary to cover some tax-free perks paid by the company benefited him - but also produced lower payroll costs, as well as savings in the Medicare portion of payroll taxes that are paid by employers, Weisselberg testified. A New York state law that defines when corporations are deemed to have committed crimes is central to the case. Part of the law says corporations may be liable if the alleged criminal conduct was "engaged in ... by a high managerial agent acting within the scope of his employment and in behalf of the corporation." Both sides re-debated the meaning of "in benefit of" during a Tuesday conference about the legal instructions that Acting Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan is scheduled to deliver to the jury on Monday. During that session, without jurors present, the trial judge noted that a defense team review of archived state legislative material appeared to leave the precise meaning unclear. Merchan ultimately gave something to both sides. He said prosecutors would need to show jurors there had been "some intent to benefit" the corporations. But defense attorneys "can't overstate what that intent was," added Merchan. The jury will also have to decide other issues. For example, Weisselberg pleaded guilty to a scheme to defraud. But who was his co-schemer? That could be Jeffrey McConney, the Trump Organization controller, whose testimony also gave both sides some of what they wanted. Testifying under a grant of immunity from prosecution, McConney admitted he knew the tax-ducking tactics he carried out were illegal. However, McConney also testified that he simply followed instructions from Weisselberg, who was his boss, and said he didn't alert other company officials. Trump Organization senior vice president and controller Jeffrey McConney returns to the courthouse after a break in the company's trial, Tuesday, Nov. 1, 2022, in New York. The legal teams also battled during the trial over what blame for the alleged crimes, if any, should be assigned to Mazars, an international audit, tax and advisory firm that previously held the lucrative account for the dozens of Trump businesses. Defense lawyers pointed to language in the Mazars engagement letter that seemed to indicate the company would flag potential illegal conduct. Prosecutors cited other written language that said the Trump companies were responsible for providing accurate financial information to Mazars. Donald Bender, a Mazars partner formerly in charge of the Trump account, testified that the company didn't spot some of the alleged tax-evasion tactics. He said he had been fooled by Weisselberg, whom he had known for many years. He testified that he was sure he'd never seen Trump Corporation spreadsheets that showed how the company gave Weisselberg and other top executives extra payments by distributing the funds as if the recipients were independent contractors. Why? "Because I probably would have had a heart attack," said Bender. Trump really did break you guys. The lefts/Dems were the party that questioned everything from the government, the media and especially their politicians. But now you’re just a bunch of lap dogs that run with any narrative feed to you. What happened to question and verify everything? The divide and conquer globalists have done their jump well, right “World Citizen”? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBP66 Posted December 1, 2022 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2022 1 hour ago, Warrior said: Trump really did break you guys. The lefts/Dems were the party that questioned everything from the government, the media and especially their politicians. But now you’re just a bunch of lap dogs that run with any narrative feed to you. What happened to question and verify everything? The divide and conquer globalists have done their jump well, right “World Citizen”? no...Trump broke the country...he tore it apart with his lies that you clowns ate like candy....he lost the popular vote...was impeached twice and started an insurrection....you can't do any worse than that...he is/was a complete failure....I hope you clowns nominate him again....😉 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolebull813 Posted December 1, 2022 Report Share Posted December 1, 2022 These are all facts that can be backed up by stats not opinions from hysterical wind bags https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/trump-administration-accomplishments/ 1 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warrior Posted December 1, 2022 Report Share Posted December 1, 2022 6 minutes ago, Nolebull813 said: These are all facts that can be backed up by stats not opinions from hysterical wind bags https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/trump-administration-accomplishments/ Dems don’t like “facts” they can’t control Nolebull813. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBP66 Posted December 1, 2022 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2022 43 minutes ago, Warrior said: Dems don’t like “facts” they can’t control Nolebull813. yea....like Trump LOST the election...😉 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeBird Posted December 1, 2022 Report Share Posted December 1, 2022 5 minutes ago, DBP66 said: yea....like Trump LOST the election...😉 Bidens an illegitimate president sound familiar 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeBird Posted December 1, 2022 Report Share Posted December 1, 2022 On 11/29/2022 at 4:42 PM, DBP66 said: FYI....@Ironman this is NOT an op-ed...😉 McConnell, McCarthy criticize Trump's dinner with white nationalist Dylan Stableford ·Senior Writer Tue, November 29, 2022 at 1:14 PM The top two Republicans in Congress on Monday condemned Nick Fuentes days after former President Donald Trump hosted the white supremacist at a dinner with Ye, the rapper formerly known as Kanye West, at Mar-a-Lago. “There is no room in the Republican Party for antisemitism or white supremacy,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell told reporters on Capitol Hill. “And anyone meeting with people advocating that point of view, in my judgment, are highly unlikely to ever be elected president of the United States.” “I don't think anybody should be spending any time with Nick Fuentes,” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said at the White House after a meeting that President Biden convened with congressional leaders. “He has no place in this Republican Party.” Trump’s dinner with Fuentes and Ye drew widespread criticism, although many Republican lawmakers had been silent on the matter. Former President Donald Trump, Ye, (formerly known as Kanye West) and Nick Fuentes. (Photo illustration: Yahoo News; photos: Andrew Harnik/AP, Ashley Landis/AP, William Edwards/AFP via Getty Images) Amid the backlash, the former president claimed he did not know who Fuentes was, but notably did not condemn his racist and antisemitic beliefs. He also did not condemn the antisemitic comments Ye made in a series of interviews, as a result of which many platforms and businesses severed ties with the rapper. On Tuesday, McCarthy, who is the leading contender to become House speaker after the GOP won a majority of seats in the chamber in the midterm elections, falsely claimed that Trump had condemned Fuentes. “Trump came out four times and condemned him and didn’t know who he was,” McCarthy said. When a reporter pointed out that Trump did not condemn Fuentes or his ideology, McCarthy said, “Well, I condemn his ideology. It has no place in society at all.” “The president can have meetings with who he wants,” McCarthy said when asked to clarify his position on Trump’s dinner guests. “But I don’t think anybody should have a meeting with Nick Fuentes. And his views are nowhere within the Republican Party or within this country itself.” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., speaks to reporters at the White House on Tuesday. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images) Fuentes, a 24-year-old Holocaust denier who has also made hateful comments about Black people and other minorities, is a popular figure on the far-right fringe. He has also been critical of McCarthy’s pursuit of the speakership. “President Trump was wrong to give a white nationalist, an antisemite, a Holocaust denier, a seat at the table,” former Vice President Mike Pence said in an interview with News Nation on Monday. “I think he should apologize for it and he should denounce those individuals and their hateful rhetoric.” McCarthy was also asked about Trump's decision to meet with Ye after the rapper's antisemitic remarks earlier this month. “I don’t think those are right comments,” McCarthy said. “And I don’t think you should associate with him as well.” Trump, who recently announced his third campaign for president, defended himself in a series of posts on Truth Social, his social media network. He noted that Ye has praised him on Fox News. “Ye, formerly known as Kanye West, was asking me for advice concerning some of his difficulties, in particular having to do with his business,” Trump wrote. “We also discussed, to a lesser extent, politics, where I told him he should definitely not run for President, 'any voters you may have should vote for TRUMP.' Anyway, we got along great, he expressed no anti-Semitism, & I appreciated all of the nice things he said about me on 'Tucker Carlson.' Why wouldn’t I agree to meet? Also, I didn’t know Nick Fuentes.” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer excoriated Trump for failing to denounce Fuentes's ideological views. “He didn't know that this virulent antisemite, this vicious man, Fuentes, was coming to dinner. But now he knows he was at dinner, and he still hasn't denounced it,” Schumer said. “That is just an utter disgrace.” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I AM IRONMAN Posted December 1, 2022 Report Share Posted December 1, 2022 1 hour ago, Warrior said: Dems don’t like “facts” they can’t control Nolebull813. Been saying that for a while! 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warrior Posted December 1, 2022 Report Share Posted December 1, 2022 1 hour ago, DBP66 said: yea....like Trump LOST the election...😉 Rinse and repeat. Good little sheep. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warrior Posted December 1, 2022 Report Share Posted December 1, 2022 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBP66 Posted December 2, 2022 Author Report Share Posted December 2, 2022 6 hours ago, Warrior said: Rinse and repeat. Good little sheep. and it still hasn't sunk in?...LOL...you guys are helpless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warrior Posted December 2, 2022 Report Share Posted December 2, 2022 4 hours ago, DBP66 said: and it still hasn't sunk in?...LOL...you guys are helpless. Haha…you’re an easy mark. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warrior Posted December 2, 2022 Report Share Posted December 2, 2022 DP, Juicy is back! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warrior Posted December 2, 2022 Report Share Posted December 2, 2022 DP, think they finally got Trump… 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I AM IRONMAN Posted December 2, 2022 Report Share Posted December 2, 2022 43 minutes ago, Warrior said: DP, think they finally got Trump… A big nothing burger according to mr cut and paste op Ed boy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBP66 Posted December 2, 2022 Author Report Share Posted December 2, 2022 6 hours ago, Warrior said: Haha…you’re an easy mark. LOL...an "easy mark" is someone like you champ....a clown who buys Trump's lies!...🤡 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBP66 Posted December 2, 2022 Author Report Share Posted December 2, 2022 5 hours ago, I AM IRONMAN said: A big nothing burger according to mr cut and paste op Ed boy still don't know what an op-ed is????....🙄 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warrior Posted December 2, 2022 Report Share Posted December 2, 2022 1 minute ago, DBP66 said: LOL...an "easy mark" is someone like you champ....a clown who buys Trump's lies!...🤡 You’re that dude getting cleaned in 3 card Molly I always laugh at. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBP66 Posted December 2, 2022 Author Report Share Posted December 2, 2022 6 hours ago, Warrior said: DP, think they finally got Trump… LOL...another Trump clown with Hillary stuck in his mind....LOL...he stole top-secret files champ....FACT...😉 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBP66 Posted December 2, 2022 Author Report Share Posted December 2, 2022 3 minutes ago, Warrior said: You’re that dude getting cleaned in 3 card Molly I always laugh at. yea sure...and Trump WON the election!!.....🤡 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBP66 Posted December 2, 2022 Author Report Share Posted December 2, 2022 5 minutes ago, Warrior said: You’re that dude getting cleaned in 3 card Molly I always laugh at. it's called 3 card Monte... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBP66 Posted December 2, 2022 Author Report Share Posted December 2, 2022 Trump Loses Special Master Review in Mar-a-Lago Files Case Zoe Tillman and Erik Larson Thu, December 1, 2022 at 8:52 PM (Bloomberg) -- The Justice Department’s criminal investigation into Donald Trump’s handling of White House documents got a major boost Thursday, as a federal appeals court ruled a judge was wrong to interfere with the probe by appointing a special master to review material seized from the former president’s Mar-a-Lago home. The decision marks the latest setback for Trump in a months-long legal fight that government lawyers say has stymied their work. Prosecutors are exploring whether Trump or anyone else mishandled government records -- including material classified at the highest level of secrecy -- or engaged in obstruction. - ADVERTISEMENT - In its order Thursday, the 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the decision of a federal judge in September to appoint a special master and block the Justice Department from using the bulk of the documents while the review was being conducted. The panel featured three judges appointed by Republican presidents, including two nominated by Trump. “The law is clear. We cannot write a rule that allows any subject of a search warrant to block government investigations after the execution of the warrant,” the appeals court said. “Nor can we write a rule that allows only former presidents to do so. Either approach would be a radical reordering of our caselaw limiting the federal courts’ involvement in criminal investigations.” Whether the latest order permanently halts the special master’s work wasn’t immediately clear. Trump could petition the full 11th Circuit to reconsider the the ruling by the three-judge panel, or he could ask the US Supreme Court to intervene. Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung sent a statement describing the appeals court opinion as “purely procedural” and claiming the “decision does not address the merits that clearly demonstrate the impropriety of the unprecedented, illegal, and unwarranted raid on Mar-a-Lago.” The statement didn’t indicate whether Trump would continue to press the case in court. During arguments before the 11th Circuit last week, one of the judges said there’d been no showing that the search was unlawful. In response, a lawyer for Trump said his team was in the process of trying to establish that. Justice Department spokesperson Myron Marlin declined to comment. The appellate panel concluded that Trump had failed to meet the high bar necessary for courts to intervene in a pending criminal investigation and that US District Judge Aileen Cannon in Florida had lacked jurisdiction to step in to the Mar-a-Lago probe. The court agreed that it was “extraordinary” for a search warrant to be executed at the home of a former president, but that didn’t mean Trump was entitled to special treatment, especially with no evidence that the search was unlawful. “To create a special exception here would defy our Nation’s foundational principle that our law applies ‘to all, without regard to numbers, wealth, or rank,’” the judges wrote. Argument Rejected The panel also rejected Trump’s argument that he needed a special master and an injunction against the government’s use of the seized documents to protect records he claimed are designated as personal under the Presidential Records Act. “The status of a document as personal or presidential does not alter the authority of the government to seize it under a warrant supported by probable cause,” the judicial panel said. “Search warrants authorize the seizure of personal records as a matter of course.” The decision was per curiam, meaning no single member of the three-judge panel claimed authorship. The panel featured two judges who had been nominated by Trump -- Britt Grant and Andrew Brasher -- and Chief Judge Bill Pryor, a George W. Bush appointee. The 11th Circuit handed down its ruling as the special master, US District Senior Judge Raymond Dearie, approaches a Dec. 16 deadline to complete his review. Dearie is vetting a master log of disputed documents and is set to issue a report to Cannon with recommendations. A Trump lawyer said during a recent hearing that the universe of disagreements had narrowed to approximately 930 documents. Cannon will decide whether to accept Dearie’s conclusions. Trump had early success blocking the government’s access to several dozen boxes of documents and other items seized from Mar-a-Lago in August under a court-approved search warrant. Cannon -- who was nominated by Trump to the south Florida federal district court -- in September granted Trump’s request to bring in an outside special master. Cannon’s ruling allowed Trump to press claims that at least some documents should be kept out of the Justice Department’s hands because they were protected by legal privileges or because he’d designated government records as “personal” under federal law. It also fueled his attacks on the investigation as politically motivated. On appeal, however, Trump was handed a string of losses. The 11th Circuit previously sided with the Justice Department when it came to a key subset of about 100 records with classified markings. A three-judge panel agreed with the government that those records should be excluded from the special master review, freeing the government to use them in the criminal investigation; Grant and Brasher had been part of that decision. The US Supreme Court rejected Trump’s request to step in. Not ‘Exceptional’ In the latest appeal, the Justice Department argued that Cannon lacked jurisdiction to entertain Trump’s request for a special master and to enter the injunction temporarily barring the use of documents under review. Courts are supposed to limit their involvement with criminal investigations before charges are filed, and Trump’s situation didn’t present the “exceptional” circumstances that would justify a judge stepping in, government lawyers argued. Government lawyers -- now under the leadership of newly appointed special counsel John L. “Jack” Smith -- said that lack of access to the bulk of the seized evidence hamstrung the investigation because the mingling of classified information and other government records with other material could be relevant to building any case. During arguments before the three-judge panel on Nov. 22, judges questioned Trump attorney James Trusty about whether the Mar-a-Lago search was unusual compared to a typical criminal, aside from Trump’s status as a former president. Trusty said they weren’t seeking “special treatment,” but also insisted that the political context was relevant. Pryor said during the hearing that the court had to be “concerned” about setting precedent that would allow any target of a criminal investigation to go into court and have a judge “interfere” with the executive branch’s work. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warrior Posted December 2, 2022 Report Share Posted December 2, 2022 22 minutes ago, DBP66 said: it's called 3 card Monte... Knew you’d remember 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.