I agree. If I were the Judge, I would have denied the motion. I just don’t think it’s an important issue or one to get riled up about. If the judge picks someone qualified, this will be over soon and no harm done.
Rudy Ghouliani?
How many of the judges assigning Special Masters in those cases were appointed by the defendant?
Mike Lindell.
I nominate Adam Schiff or Michael Cohen.
I hear Ms. Clinton is not busy.
She already has TS clearance…
I heard Barack Obama might be an option. I’d laugh as Trumps head explodes.
All joking aside, that would be a fantastic choice. He is a former lawyer and Constitutional scholar, as well as having 8 years of experience wielding executive privilege himself. He’s possibly the most qualified person you could ever have in that job.
I’m a big L. Lin Wood fan, myself.
Don’t both parties have to agree on the appointment? I predict that Trump will reject every proposal, no matter how objectively fair and qualified they are, and then claim the biased and unfair candidates the dems tried to appoint are proof of the conspiracy against him.
From the other thread, the lawyers provide a list of names and the judge chooses one:
Oh, boy, that’s not good. The judge can probably just choose any trump toady she pleases, then, since who’s going to stop her if she does pick Michael Flynn or the pillow guy?
The federal appeals court that Bill Barr says the DOJ should be filing an appeal with because the decision was so outrageous.
I realise the discussion has moved passed this but this isn’t correct I don’t think. I’m not a US lawyer but whether or not a document is subject to LPP is not controlled by markings. It is controlled by reality.
A US lawyer could step in and tell me I’m wrong, but if Trump’s lawyer asked Trump to provide some information about a situation so that the lawyer could advise, and Trump sat at his desk and scribbled some notes on the back of an envelope for the lawyer that could and probably would be privileged.
Whether any given document is privileged is not always clear.
I agree with you up to a point. Attorney Client privilege can’t be claimed for no reason. The subject of an investigation can’t simply declare privilege, as you say there has to be actual privilege and one aspect of that is that the information has been kept private. That assumption is questionable when documents are found mixed in among obviously non-privileged information.
Having your papers in a mess doesn’t negate privilege. Nor is that inherently relevant to confidentiality.
Privileged information must be kept private. It can’t be shared with any other person. You can’t sort through a box of mixed papers with no way to determine who has seen them and then pick out particular papers and call them privileged. Nothing is confidential if it hasn’t been kept private.
Okay, I missed that. Now I see a reason to appeal, even though it will make the whole thing take longer. I had assumed the above, that the list would be one that both lawyers would agree on.
That seems like something that should be changed, honestly. You don’t want there to be a possibility that someone is picked who would be favorable to either side. Even without a biased judge, a judge could pick someone not knowing they had a conflict of interest.