Trump, the man with a dream of a Wall

[Forty Two]

If Trump really wants to fight back against Mueller, fuck firing the guy. Help Cohen fight this fucking warrant -- he should go full-boar on the due process and constitutional right of an entity (his law firm) to access to the sealed warrant and supporting affidavit/materials. Go right in and litigate that issue immediately, demanding immediate relief. It takes time to get before the court, so the three month rule in Semtex would work -- ask the court to schedule a hearing in a month or two and get the judge to declare tha the warrant and affidavit will be unsealed, but any undercover operatives can be redacted. Then Trump should take the position that the people have the right to know, and that it's time for Mueller to show some cards, if he has any.

In In the Matter of Searches of Semtex Industrial Corp., et al., supra, the district court held that the indefinite sealing of a warrant affidavit was inappropriate, even in an ongoing multi-state investigation involving multiple unindicted targets.58 Based on the common law right of access, the district court ordered the unsealing of the warrant affidavit within approximately three months, whether an indictment has been returned, "except as to information regarding undercover agents or cooperators." Although the Semtex investigation is a complex multi-state, multi-target investigation (and the government sought to protect the identity of confidential informants and undercover agents), the district court held that an indefinite pre-indictment seal was inappropriate. Thus, although complexity and scope are important factors in the sealing equation, In re Search Warrants Issued August 29, 1994,60 the Semtex court establishes that these items may not be the basis for an indefinite pre-indictment seal.

The government routinely asserts that rights of access (constitutional and common law) automatically disappear, or that they are ipso facto overcome, whenever there is a criminal investigation in progress. That the government is wrong is demonstrated by cases such as Semtex, which ordered search warrant applications unsealed during criminal investigations. These cases demonstrate that rights of access exist before indictment, as well as after, and are overcome only where the government can establish that sealing is necessary to preserve higher values (common law right), or is essential to a compelling government interest (constitutional right).

Courts are far too willing to accept uncritically the government's assertions that search warrant applications should be kept secret even after execution of the warrants. However, there is ample precedent to demand that the interests of all parties be considered, and not just the interests of the government. And some high powered, Park Avenue attorneys like Trump's other firm, Morgan Lewis, should be able to add some persuasion to the mix.

Judges must appreciate that the execution of a search warrant is not just a minor intrusion on the operations of a business organization, especially a fucking law firm. Those on the receiving end have a legitimate interest in knowing, and often challenging, the basis for the government's action.

Start fighting Trump!

[Animavore]

I'd love to believe that rapist, conman, fraudster, theif is going to end up behind bars where he rightfully belongs, but I've lost faith in humanity. Nothing will happen to him.

[Forty Two]

One would hope that even guys as shitty as Trump would still have to actually have evidence of a crime against them before they are convicted. That's really all I hope for.

[Tero]

Lobster and champagne for all Republicans now! Bill it to the government. Ryan will no longer check your expense reports. The Republicans, save McCain and a few hold outs, are all Trumpian now.

[L'Emmerdeur]

If Trump really wants to fight back against Mueller, fuck firing the guy. Help Cohen fight this fucking warrant -- he should go full-boar on the due process and constitutional right of an entity (his law firm) to access to the sealed warrant and supporting affidavit/materials. Go right in and litigate that issue immediately, demanding immediate relief. It takes time to get before the court, so the three month rule in Semtex would work -- ask the court to schedule a hearing in a month or two and get the judge to declare tha the warrant and affidavit will be unsealed, but any undercover operatives can be redacted. Then Trump should take the position that the people have the right to know, and that it's time for Mueller to show some cards, if he has any.

In In the Matter of Searches of Semtex Industrial Corp., et al., supra, the district court held that the indefinite sealing of a warrant affidavit was inappropriate, even in an ongoing multi-state investigation involving multiple unindicted targets.58 Based on the common law right of access, the district court ordered the unsealing of the warrant affidavit within approximately three months, whether an indictment has been returned, "except as to information regarding undercover agents or cooperators." Although the Semtex investigation is a complex multi-state, multi-target investigation (and the government sought to protect the identity of confidential informants and undercover agents), the district court held that an indefinite pre-indictment seal was inappropriate. Thus, although complexity and scope are important factors in the sealing equation, In re Search Warrants Issued August 29, 1994,60 the Semtex court establishes that these items may not be the basis for an indefinite pre-indictment seal.

The government routinely asserts that rights of access (constitutional and common law) automatically disappear, or that they are ipso facto overcome, whenever there is a criminal investigation in progress. That the government is wrong is demonstrated by cases such as Semtex, which ordered search warrant applications unsealed during criminal investigations. These cases demonstrate that rights of access exist before indictment, as well as after, and are overcome only where the government can establish that sealing is necessary to preserve higher values (common law right), or is essential to a compelling government interest (constitutional right).

Courts are far too willing to accept uncritically the government's assertions that search warrant applications should be kept secret even after execution of the warrants. However, there is ample precedent to demand that the interests of all parties be considered, and not just the interests of the government. And some high powered, Park Avenue attorneys like Trump's other firm, Morgan Lewis, should be able to add some persuasion to the mix.

Judges must appreciate that the execution of a search warrant is not just a minor intrusion on the operations of a business organization, especially a fucking law firm. Those on the receiving end have a legitimate interest in knowing, and often challenging, the basis for the government's action.

Start fighting Trump!

You failed to cite your source, nor did you even acknowledge that large parts of your post were written by somebody else. An inadvertent oversight, no doubt.

[Forty Two]

My apologies - https://www.nacdl.org/CHAMPION/ARTICLES/96mar01.htm

Not exactly difficult to find, but obviously you have a different goal, given the implication in your post, than just discussing the issues. My practice, as should be quite obvious from my posts, is to always cite sources, and I do so in far greater numbers than many folks here. I typically support my assertions with citations and links. I don't bury the titles or the sources in embedded links, so the reader generally knows the source I provide, and I usually, but not always, quote important parts from the source.

Also, the source of this material was the important part - the case citations are - and those can be googled to read the actual case if you search by name of the case.

[tattuchu]

I'd love to believe that rapist, conman, fraudster, thief is going to end up behind bars where he rightfully belongs, but I've lost faith in humanity. Nothing will happen to him.

Historically, U.S. American presidents don't go to prison -- they get impeached and then they get pardoned. I'd like to see Trump in prison where he belongs, but I have a difficult time imagining it actually happening. Of course, no president's offences have been more egregious than Trump's... so it'll be interesting, if nothing else, to see how this all plays out.

[tattuchu]

If Trump really wants to fight back against Mueller, fuck firing the guy. Help Cohen fight this fucking warrant -- he should go full-boar on the due process and constitutional right of an entity (his law firm) to access to the sealed warrant and supporting affidavit/materials. Go right in and litigate that issue immediately, demanding immediate relief. It takes time to get before the court, so the three month rule in Semtex would work -- ask the court to schedule a hearing in a month or two and get the judge to declare tha the warrant and affidavit will be unsealed, but any undercover operatives can be redacted. Then Trump should take the position that the people have the right to know, and that it's time for Mueller to show some cards, if he has any.

In In the Matter of Searches of Semtex Industrial Corp., et al., supra, the district court held that the indefinite sealing of a warrant affidavit was inappropriate, even in an ongoing multi-state investigation involving multiple unindicted targets.58 Based on the common law right of access, the district court ordered the unsealing of the warrant affidavit within approximately three months, whether an indictment has been returned, "except as to information regarding undercover agents or cooperators." Although the Semtex investigation is a complex multi-state, multi-target investigation (and the government sought to protect the identity of confidential informants and undercover agents), the district court held that an indefinite pre-indictment seal was inappropriate. Thus, although complexity and scope are important factors in the sealing equation, In re Search Warrants Issued August 29, 1994,60 the Semtex court establishes that these items may not be the basis for an indefinite pre-indictment seal.

The government routinely asserts that rights of access (constitutional and common law) automatically disappear, or that they are ipso facto overcome, whenever there is a criminal investigation in progress. That the government is wrong is demonstrated by cases such as Semtex, which ordered search warrant applications unsealed during criminal investigations. These cases demonstrate that rights of access exist before indictment, as well as after, and are overcome only where the government can establish that sealing is necessary to preserve higher values (common law right), or is essential to a compelling government interest (constitutional right).

Courts are far too willing to accept uncritically the government's assertions that search warrant applications should be kept secret even after execution of the warrants. However, there is ample precedent to demand that the interests of all parties be considered, and not just the interests of the government. And some high powered, Park Avenue attorneys like Trump's other firm, Morgan Lewis, should be able to add some persuasion to the mix.

Judges must appreciate that the execution of a search warrant is not just a minor intrusion on the operations of a business organization, especially a fucking law firm. Those on the receiving end have a legitimate interest in knowing, and often challenging, the basis for the government's action.

Start fighting Trump!

You failed to cite your source, nor did you even acknowledge that large parts of your post were written by somebody else. An inadvertent oversight, no doubt.

I agree with the last sentence, though: Start fighting Trump!

[Animavore]

[JimC]

It's amazing what a comma can do...

"Call me Ishmael"

"Call me, Ishmael"

[Forty Two]

I'd love to believe that rapist, conman, fraudster, thief is going to end up behind bars where he rightfully belongs, but I've lost faith in humanity. Nothing will happen to him.

Historically, U.S. American presidents don't go to prison -- they get impeached and then they get pardoned. I'd like to see Trump in prison where he belongs, but I have a difficult time imagining it actually happening. Of course, no president's offences have been more egregious than Trump's... so it'll be interesting, if nothing else, to see how this all plays out.

That never happened, actually. Nixon was never impeached, but he was pardoned. Clinton was impeached but acquitted by Congress, convicted of minor crimes, but never pardoned. Johnson was impeached and acquitted by Congress, but never convicted of a crime or pardoned. So, the historical precedent or pattern you mention does not exist.

What should Trump be in prison for?

No President's offenses have been more egregious than Trump's? You mean Nixon's orchestrating of the break ins of the Democratic National Committee offices, and the psychiatrist office of Daniel Ellsburg's psychiatrist's office, and then obstructing justice to keep it secret? What about Nixon's coup of Allende in Chile?

What about President Kennedy unilaterally orchestrating an armed invasion of Cuba in 1962 without Congressional authorization, not in self-defense, and without any UN authorization or approval?

What about President Johnson faking the Gulf of Tonkin incident to justify escalation of the War in Vietnam?

Trump's crimes that exceed those are.......... ?

[Brian Peacock]

If Trump is going to start fighting Cohen's corner then I bet Cohen and his defence are hoping he won't do it via Twitter and impromptu asides to the press. Let due process run it's course Donald - the best way you can help your friend and employee is to keep your big mouth shut!

[Forty Two]

If Trump is going to start fighting Cohen's corner then I bet Cohen and his defence are hoping he won't do it via Twitter and impromptu asides to the press. Let due process run it's course Donald - the best way you can help your friend and employee is to keep your big mouth shut!

Cohen is not his employee. It's his private attorney. He does not employ Cohen.

And, due process is the key point there. Let's see if Cohen gets any, or if this is just the typical federal prosecutor tactic to try to get him to "turn" and provide testimony in exchange for immunity or leniency bribes, the juicier the testimony, the more leniency is allowed.

[Brian Peacock]

You mean the more dirt he can dish the better it will be for him?

[L'Emmerdeur]

A short American civics lesson-- Impeachment by the US House of Representatives is analogous to bringing an indictment. This is followed by a trial before the US Senate, which will determine whether the accused shall be removed from office.

A short American history lesson-- Bill Clinton was impeached. Contrary to what some may believe, he was never convicted of any crime. However, he was held to be in civil contempt of court (as opposed to criminal contempt of court) by a US District Court judge and fined. His impeachment trial resulted in a vote by the Senate to acquit.