I was confused for a moment because Trusty and John Rowley had withdrawn from the federal documents case some time ago (I believe that Trump falsely claimed he fired them) but apparently Trusty was still representing him in the CNN case. But not any more.
As hard as it must be to work for Trump in any capacity – unless you’re very good at dodging flying dishes and ketchup bottles and don’t mind working for free – working for him as a lawyer must be the worst!
One thing that occurred to me is that her bench (Southern District of Florida) may have let it be known privately to her that she can keep the case, provided she be open to and willing to follow guidance from mentor judges along the way.
The Southern District of Florida judges don’t want to embarrass her, but neither do they want a black mark on their record for pooching (arguably) the biggest case tried in American history.
Pure speculation on my part.
Here’s your cite.
Trump has ethical whims?
Won’t that be refreshing?
Even if Cannon throws this case, I think Smith has adequate backup plans to finally impose some accountability on Trump. It’s a death match, and I’m not surprised the Trump side will pull every horrid trick they can get away with.
Can’t win 'em all, though. And I think the January 6th case is drawing near.
If any Trump lawyer did NOT take notes, it could only be because he was secretly taping the conversation on two different recorders, the second one as an emergency backup. 
May well be true, but if not literally and exactly true, I strongly suspect that there is significant pressure on Loose Cannon from other sources. I would be astounded if she even remotely tried to take the kind of extraordinary liberties this time as the ones she got so badly slapped down for.
There was speculation on MSNBC this week, that if the Florida case goes badly, they could indict him in New Jersey for waving around the documents in Bedminster.
I did see that, too. I suspect he’d prefer not to, but it’s good to know that not all is lost for accountability in this jaw-dropping matter of stealing highly classified documents if the worst happens.
Who knows? Smith might file the New Jersey case irrespective of what happens in Florida. If crimes were committed there, I think he should.
I know it’s a really old cliche, but the feds did finally get Al Capone on something.
It reminds me of one episode of The Office, where Dwight gives Jim a wooden duck as a gift that quite obviously is bugged. Jim tries to be clever and mess with Dwight by saying misinformation around the duck, and otherwise making it so Dwight can’t hear other things through the duck.
But Dwight also subtly bugged a pen, and hears everything through that.
Maybe they just have a decoy recorder to give Trump false confidence when he gets it confiscated.
Man, I’m burning through my available gift links this month. Definitely worth it for this one!
From the article:
The court papers — a standard request to place a protective order on the discovery material — contained no explanation about what those other inquiries might be or whether they were related to the indictment detailing charges against Mr. Trump of illegally retaining dozens of national defense documents and obstructing the government’s efforts to get them back. The papers also did not identify who the uncharged people were.
Still, the reference to continuing investigations was the first overt suggestion — however vague — that other criminal cases could emerge from the work that the special counsel Jack Smith has done in bringing the Espionage Act and obstruction indictment against Mr. Trump in Miami last week.
(Please, please, please let one of them be Boris Epshteyn.)
She may finally have come to the conclusion that tRump is going down no matter what shenanigans she pulls. Why torpedo her own career over a sinking ship?
“I like lawyers who don’t tell me what to do.”
Maybe it’s this. All notes taken during review of the classified docs will be kept under lock & key with documented chain of custody. MediasTouch.
https://youtu.be/ZxLWI3huYo4?t=190
Sidebar please: what is the CNN case? Too much Trump litigation for me to keep straight.
Quite right! 
It’s one of the more obscure ones (i.e- “not to be taken seriously”) where Trump is trying to sue CNN for defamation …
A lawyer who was representing former President Donald Trump in his defamation lawsuit against CNN said Friday that he was withdrawing from the case, in the latest sign of the break-up of the Trump legal team since the lawyer, Jim Trusty, and another Trump attorney stopped representing the former president in the criminal documents case against him.
Learn something new every day. I had not heard of this case. Thanks.
Defamation… because they told the truth about him?
And it doesn’t interfere with his election campaign? Because I’m pretty sure he said being in court interferes with his election campaign.
Being dragged into court against his will interferes with his campaigning.
Going to court voluntarily to stick it to others is part of his campaign.
Totally different, really.
If I ever had a client who told me not to take notes, I wouldn’t be working for that client any longer.