FBI Search and Seizure at Trump's Mar-A-Lago Residence, August 8, 2022, Case Dismissed July 15, 2024

[running_coach]

@JohnT

Two of the lawyers mentioned above, Trusty and Cocoran, filed a petition to represent their client in Federal Court.

Tragically, they filed this standard form incorrectly and have been instructed to do so again:

https://twitter.com/chrisgeidner/status/1562083251291934721?t=XDoidvaNV-p6zNxK7-aBfA&s=19

Long story short, until this is resolved, only 1 of Trump’s attorneys can appear in front of Federal Court to argue his case. -

Why not just hire Jerry Callow?

[chappachula]

@JohnT

until this is resolved, only 1 of Trump’s attorneys can appear in front of Federal Court to argue his case.

could this be an intentional “mistake”?

Maybe to delay proceedings?
Or even to file an appeal later when things go badly for Trump and they try to claim that Trump was denied proper legal representation, because the court refused to listen to the expert lawyer who was not present?
It may sound stupid, but no more so than many of the election-fraud cases

[JohnT]

No, because the form can just be resubmitted and the third attorney is already cleared to practice in Federal Court.

[Lance_Turbo]

I’m confused by this lawyer business (again). Evan Corcoran just represented Steve Bannon in his contempt trial. Wasn’t that in federal court?

[Robot_Arm]

I didn’t read the motion, but it starts with “(p)olitics cannot be allowed to impact the administration of justice.” The very next sentence cites Trump’s political situation.

[Czarcasm]

@Si_Amigo

No, I think he reads the Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.

Not unless there is a Comics Illustrated version of it.

[Pardel-Lux]

There are many! Just search for “comics illustrated” and WWII.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@Robot_Arm

I didn’t read the motion, but it starts with “(p)olitics cannot be allowed to impact the administration of justice.” The very next sentence cites Trump’s political situation.

Yes, this stood out for me as well. I think they forgot the implied bit at the end of the first sentence:
"(p)olitics cannot be allowed to impact the administration of justice.” (Unless you’re a Republican, then you get a free pass)

[JohnT]

@Lance_Turbo

I’m confused by this lawyer business (again). Evan Corcoran just represented Steve Bannon in his contempt trial. Wasn’t that in federal court?

Yes. But this case is in Florida and the two attorneys are not members of the bar in Florida. This is a standard form for such attorneys to use if they have to represent themselves in Federal Court within a state to which they are not licensed to practice.

[CurtC]

@chappachula

could this be an intentional “mistake”?

Maybe to delay proceedings?
Or even to file an appeal later when things go badly for Trump

So Trump is playing 5D chess again?
The simple answer is that Trump is not even getting lawyers from the bottom of the barrel, he’s getting the scum that sticks to the bottom after the lawyers at the bottom have been drained out.

[Lance_Turbo]

@JohnT

This is a standard form for such attorneys to use if they have to represent themselves in Federal Court within a state to which they are not licensed to practice.

Thanks. Makes sense.

[Procrustus]

@CurtC

The simple answer is that Trump is not even getting lawyers from the bottom of the barrel, he’s getting the scum that sticks to the bottom after the lawyers at the bottom have been drained out.

I looked into the bio of the Trusty guy. He seems otherwise legit. Former state and federal prosecutor, teaches trial practice. Went to good schools. Not sure how Trump convinced him to ride with him to the depths of Hell, but I’m betting it has something to do with a good payday. Hope he doesn’t implode like Rudy. (or maybe I should hope he does)

[Ike_Witt]

@BobLibDem

To be fair, he once put together a jigsaw puzzle in 3 hours even though the box said 2-4 years.

I’m filing this away for future use.

[Akaj]

@Euphonious_Polemic

@Robot_Arm

I didn’t read the motion, but it starts with “(p)olitics cannot be allowed to impact the administration of justice.” The very next sentence cites Trump’s political situation.

Yes, this stood out for me as well. I think they forgot the implied bit at the end of the first sentence:
"(p)olitics cannot be allowed to impact the administration of justice.” (Unless you’re a Republican, then you get a free pass)

It makes perfect sense if you’re Trump. Since he’s so wonderful in every way, any action against him can only be political persecution. Stating that he’s a likely frontrunner in 2024 is – to him – evidence that the Mar-a-Lago search had to be politically motivated. He clearly believes that if he were definitely not running, the FBI wouldn’t have moved against him.

[snowthx]

@Procrustus

Not sure how Trump convinced him to ride with him to the depths of Hell, but I’m betting it has something to do with a good payday.

I hope he got a large retainer, knowing this odious client has a penchant for stiffing people who work for him.

[running_coach]

@snowthx

@Procrustus

Not sure how Trump convinced him to ride with him to the depths of Hell, but I’m betting it has something to do with a good payday.

I hope he got a large retainer, knowing this odious client has a penchant for stiffing people who work for him. -

I hope he didn’t. Lessons need to be learned.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@Akaj

He clearly believes that if he were definitely not running, the FBI wouldn’t have moved against him.

I know it’s been said here before but…

The FBI moved on him like a bitch. They didn’t even wait. When you’re a federal agency, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab 'em by the classified documents. You can do anything.

[Lance_Turbo]

Asha Rangappa, national security analyst and former Yale Law School dean, agrees with my earlier assessment that the Trump filing is a confession.

Not really, though? Trump is basing his request for a Special Master on claims of executive privilege. And docs which would implicate EP are -by definition- official documents, ergo covered by the search because they belong to NARA, not him. The filing is basically a confession

Asha Rangappa

[Sage_Rat]

@Euphonious_Polemic

@Robot_Arm

I didn’t read the motion, but it starts with “(p)olitics cannot be allowed to impact the administration of justice.” The very next sentence cites Trump’s political situation.

Yes, this stood out for me as well. I think they forgot the implied bit at the end of the first sentence:
"(p)olitics cannot be allowed to impact the administration of justice.” (Unless you’re a Republican, then you get a free pass)

The motion is pretty ridiculous in its tone and superfluous content but I think the seeming disconnect here is actually reasonable.

It sounds funny to say, “Let’s not get politics involved in this. I am the leading political leader in the world and all should vote for me!” But the argument that (I believe) they’re trying to make is:

1. I am a notable politician with a strong chance of success.
2. Other politicians are currently running things and they have their hands on the levers, pursuing me through the legal process, to try and block me from joining a free and fair election.
3. That should not be. Politics should not be part of the judicial process.

It throws you off, here, because they bypass point #2 as so obvious that it doesn’t even need saying, and put the cart before the horse by leading with an incompletely stated point 3, leading into point 1.

[excavating_for_a_mind]

@Sage_Rat

…
But the argument that (I believe) they’re trying to make is:

1. I am a notable politician with a strong chance of success.
2. Other politicians are currently running things and they have their hands on the levers, pursuing me through the legal process, to try and block me from joining a free and fair election.
3. That should not be. Politics should not be part of the judicial process.

It throws you off, here, because they bypass point #2 as so obvious that it doesn’t even need saying, and put the cart before the horse by leading with an incompletely stated point 3, leading into point 1.

My reading is that this is by intent. That is, if the Trump team were to claim that the “other politicians” were attempting to “block me from joining a free and fair election,” the Trump team might have to say, in court, that not only is this what they believe, but that they have actual evidence of this being true. They make this claim in public, but not to the court, where there are consequences for peddling false and misleading information.

Very similar to the allegations of fraud in the 2020 election. This was broadcast high and wide to the entire nation, but when they went to court, no such claims were ever made.