August 17, 20224 yr Author https://thefederalist.com/2022/08/17/in-latest-anti-trump-operation-doj-and-media-deploy-same-old-russiagate-tricks/ 10 Similarities Between The FBI’s Mar-A-Lago Raid And Spygate By: Margot Cleveland August 17, 2022 11 min read Image CreditTrump White House/Flickr The DOJ and FBI think they can execute the same game plan they did for the last six years without the public noticing. They can’t. Margot Cleveland Visit on Twitter @ProfMJCleveland More Articles Share Share Article on Facebook Share Article on Twitter Share Article via Email The FBI’s raid on Mar-a-Lago reveals the deep-state cabal and their corrupt media partners deployed no fewer than 10 of the same tradecrafts used to push the Russia-collusion hoax. And with that, history is repeating itself with the same corrupt plot. 1. A Shocking Storyline of Trump Putting America at Risk With the Russia-collusion hoax, Democrats and a complicit media cartel warned the country that Trump’s relationship with Russia presented a clear and present danger to America. While the reporting oscillated from Trump being too pally with Vladimir Putin to Putin having leverage over Trump, to Trump being a Russian agent, the narrative underlying the hoax was one that, if true, presented the public with a serious national security concern. Similarly, the hoax surrounding the search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home rests on claimed misconduct which, if true, raises concerns of a dire national security crisis. Like having a Russian stooge or agent in the White House, Trump keeping supposedly top-secret documents unsecured in his Florida home suggests a serious threat to our national security. In both cases, the seriousness of the supposed threat to America’s national security seeks to justify the government’s extreme measures to target Trump. 2. The Building of a Narrative To support the idea that Trump’s supposed misconduct created a serious risk to America, both the Biden administration and the press quickly converged on the "classified materials” narrative. But none of the crimes on which the Mar-a-Lago search warrant was premised involved crimes related to the illegal possession or storage of "classified materials.” Nonetheless, the media coverage immediately framed the raid as based on the presence of "classified” and even "top secret” materials. Supposed government sources even went so far as to claim the material kept at Trump’s home related to nuclear secrets. Coverage of the raid sought to further cement this narrative in the public’s consciousness by quoting past public officials bemoaning Trump’s disregard for American secrets. By quickly framing the raid as concerning classified materials, the bad guys hoped the public would ignore the outrageousness of a search of a former president’s home. The backlash came nonetheless, but had the public understood that the fight concerned documents desired by the United States archivist, even stronger pushback would have been likely. This same scenario played out with SpyGate, with the supposed standard-bearers of journalism reporting Trump and his campaign’s every connection to Russia to create a backdrop against which Trump would be believed to be a Russian collaborator. But unlike SpyGate, Americans have seen this show before and recognize the plot. 3. Leaks, Leaks Everywhere, and Not a Name to Seek To build their preferred narrative, the Department of Justice and the FBI began leaking like a spigot. While Attorney General Merrick Garland stoically proclaimed during his press statement that he will speak through his court filings, his underlings sowed various storylines throughout the press — and always as unnamed sources. Americans saw the same scenario from 2016 on, when leaks to the media revealed everything from the FISA surveillance of Carter Page, to the briefing of President Donald Trump on the salacious details of the Steele dossier. The leaks, then, sought to further the Russia-collusion storyline, and now they seek to push the idea that Trump committed a crime that threatens our country’s national security. 4. Same Suspicious Names The names of the players involved in the Russia-collusion hoax and the hoax that’s going nuclear represent the fourth similarity. With the Russia-collusion hoax, the New York Times and the Washington Post served as the unofficial scribes for the government leakers, pushing whatever storylines best furthered the plots. Shortly after news of the raid broke, the New York Times and the Washington Post began running tips from "unnamed government sources” "familiar with the investigation.” Not only were the same outlets used to peddle the DOJ and FBI’s selected and slanted leaks, but some of the same journalists involved in the Russia hoax have been covering the raid, such as Tom Hamburger whose emails with Fusion GPS exposed his connection to the scandal. And then there’s Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., who lied to the American public about the FISA applications used to surveil Carter Page. Schiff quickly expressed concern about the "top secret documents” the feds seized from Mar-a-Lago, but he remains snail-slow in apologizing for perpetuating the Russia-collusion hoax. 5. Don’t Question Authority Schiff also pushed another ploy used in earlier get-Trump hoaxes, namely condemning criticism of the FBI. "The GOP’s unfounded attacks on the FBI are grossly irresponsible,” Schiff wrote in reference to criticism of the raid, adding that it "will only lead to further violence, if they do not stop.” Schiff’s comments add to those made by FBI Director Christopher Wray and Garland, both of whom chastised those who dared call into question the FBI’s integrity. The country witnessed a similar going-on-the-offensive counter to complaints over the handling of the Russia investigation. But after four years of government officials defending the men and women of the FBI and the DOJ’s handling of Crossfire Hurricane, Americans discovered the rot ran straight through to the top. So the silence-them schtick seen of late is unlikely to work this time. 6. Changing Narratives Another ploy unlikely to go unnoticed by the country after living through six years of the SpyGate scandal concerns the ever-changing justifications provided for the government’s targeting of a political enemy. Within the course of one week, a complicit media rolled out for the feds a constantly changing series of excuses for the Rubicon-crossing raid. First, the possible presence of "nuclear secrets” justified the raid, and then when social media mocked that theory, the press moved to the need to protect "classified documents.” Next, the media floated the idea that videos suggested the documents were not secure and then changed the storyline again to say Trump people might be secretly moving the documents. Later came the theory that a confidential human source prompted the search, and later the rationale changed to the search being justified by a supposed lie Trump’s attorney told that there were no documents present at Mar-a-Lago marked classified. The justification-of-the-day routine hearkens back to the changing rationales proffered to support Crossfire Hurricane. It was a tip about George Papadopoulos — well that and all these folks having connections to Russia. It wasn’t really the Steele dossier until it was again. But wait, the firing of FBI Director James Comey — that needs investigation too. Nothing stood up then as a solid justification because nothing mattered but getting Trump. Everything else was a pretext. Nothing stands up to scrutiny now either. 7. Court Filings Are Too Important to Share Another similarity between the hoaxes concerns the need to keep the court filings secret. In SpyGate, it took years before the government released the FISA applications submitted to obtain a court order to surveil Carter Page. And once released, the redactions made much of the information useless. Later, additional disclosures and the inspector general’s report on FISA abuse revealed that the FISA applications, on which the government obtained court approval to spy on Page, were replete with false representations and material omissions. Those applications proved so defective, in fact, that the government later conceded probable cause did not support the surveillance of Page. In the case of the raid on Mar-a-Lago, the government similarly claims the search warrant application is too vital to be released. As a matter of law, the DOJ’s position is sound. As a matter of lessons learned, the secrecy surrounding the affidavit raises serious concerns that the basis for the search of Trump’s home would not withstand public scrutiny. 8. The Return of the Confidential Human Source Among the leaks spread over the last week, the most familiar one concerned the FBI’s claimed use of a confidential human source. That CHS provided the FBI with important evidence concerning the documents stored at Mar-a-Lago and reportedly informed the government that Trump had withheld more documents than agents knew. This reporting by the CHS supposedly led the FBI to move forward with the search warrant application. The Crossfire Hurricane investigation also involved the FBI’s use of CHS, such as Christopher Steele, Stefan Halper, and Rodney Joffe. And that experience leaves Americans leery of the news that a CHS provided the intel necessary to obtain the search warrant. 9. A Partisan Bureaucrat with a Disdain for Trump As stories of Russia collusion began to unravel, Americans also learned of the anti-Trump sentiments shared by many of the agents on the Crossfire Hurricane team. The text exchanges between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok first woke the country to the reality that politics played a part in the probe. Later, an independent investigation into the prosecution of retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn revealed a "get Trump” attitude permeated the entire investigation. While it has not yet been even two weeks since the FBI raided Mar-a-Lago, substantial evidence of a political motive already exists. First, we have the disparate treatment between the former Republican president and the Democrat president’s son who is under investigation and has been since 2018. Then there’s the difference between the FBI’s kid-glove handling of Hillary Clinton and the raid used with Trump. The latter difference proves especially enlightening because both cases involved the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). When NARA, which until late April 2022, was led by head archivist David S. Ferriero, learned of Clinton’s use of a non-governmental email account, Ferriero did not "initiate[] an ‘Investigation’ of Secretary Clinton’s email practices.” Instead, he communicated "with the State Department on this matter” and "deferr[ed] to the State Department’s review (and any other agencies conducting Investigations).” In contrast, after NARA retrieved 15 boxes of presidential records from Mar-a-Lago and discovered some contained documents marked as classified, NARA immediately requested that the DOJ investigate the matter. The DOJ then used a grand jury to subpoena documents from Trump, as well as to obtain footage from security cameras — investigative techniques never used with Clinton. That NARA prompted the investigation of Trump and the use of a grand jury proves especially suspect given that Ferriero led the agency at the time and later admitted to retiring to ensure President Biden could choose his successor, suggesting a partisan heartbeat inside the bureaucrat. Ferriero also called Jan. 6 the worst day of his life and claimed when he saw Trump leaving the White House for the last time with a box, he asked himself, "What the hell’s in that box?” Such a response suggests a case of Trump Derangement Syndrome — something seen throughout the Crossfire Hurricane investigation too. 10. A Quick Denial Before Downplaying the Problem A 10th similarly seen between the Russia-collusion hoax and the latest crusade to crush Trump involves the media’s penchant for denying charges against the government only later to downplay what agents did. With Crossfire Hurricane, you saw the press denying that any spying took place on Trump or his campaign. But once it came out that the government had a confidential human source record conversations with members of the Trump campaign and that an FBI agent presented a briefing for Trump and Flynn as part of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, the media spun the significance of those revelations by framing them as "not spying.” Less than two weeks into the latest investigation of Trump, the press is putting on a repeat performance as seen by the immediate denial of Trump’s claim that the FBI seized his passports. But when the government admitted to taking Trump’s passports by mistake, the press merely spun the story as a mistake promptly corrected. The DOJ and FBI, however, are making a bigger mistake: They continue to think they can execute the same game plan they did for the last six years without the public seeing the similarities. They can’t, and the widespread backlash to the search proves Americans refuse to be fooled again. Margot Cleveland is The Federalist's senior legal correspondent. She is also a contributor to National Review Online, the Washington Examiner, Aleteia, and Townhall.com, and has been published in the Wall Street Journal and USA Today. Cleveland is a lawyer and a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Prize—the law school’s highest honor. She later served for nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Cleveland is a former full-time university faculty member and now teaches as an adjunct from time to time. As a stay-at-home homeschooling mom of a young son with cystic fibrosis, Cleveland frequently writes on cultural issues related to parenting and special-needs children. Cleveland is on Twitter at @ProfMJCleveland. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.
August 17, 20224 yr I'm working on an article called "10 Similarities Between Procus and the Homeless Guy I Just Saw Taking a Sheet in a Storm Drain". I'll post when I get a minute.
August 17, 20224 yr 47 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said: Biden's campaign team will have the easiest job ever. The ads will basically write themselves. Trump team can literally run a montage of Biden dementia'ing in public.
August 17, 20224 yr 5 minutes ago, VanHammersly said: I'm working on an article called "10 Similarities Between Procus and the Homeless Guy I Just Saw Taking a Sheet in a Storm Drain". I'll post when I get a minute. For the follow up, "10 similarities between Procus and a flat earther"
August 17, 20224 yr 1 minute ago, Kz! said: Trump team can literally run a montage of Biden dementia'ing in public.
August 17, 20224 yr 2 minutes ago, Kz! said: Trump team can literally run a montage of Biden dementia'ing in public. Technically, that is a montage of Trump dementia'ing. MF'er broke a law that he personally signed.
August 17, 20224 yr Just now, downundermike said: There's your ad. No commentary even necessary lmao.
August 17, 20224 yr 15 minutes ago, VanHammersly said: I'm working on an article called "10 Similarities Between Procus and the Homeless Guy I Just Saw Taking a Sheet in a Storm Drain". I'll post when I get a minute. 1) Both say things like "I'm not a Trump Supporter but the election sure seemed fishy to me." 2) Both have a cardboard box strapped to their hip with the word "ivermectin" scribbled across the front in black sharpie 3) Both proclaim they're "lawyers" and can provide expert legal analysis on command 4) Both know people who got the jab and died a week later 5) Both own "Members- Only" jackets 6) Both have an affinity for various equestrian sports and can be seen on Sunday mornings galloping in the park on all fours 7) Both don't believe in literally every conspiracy theory ever concocted, but are just eager to ask questions because they know the man doesn't want them to know the truth 8.) Both mutter things under their breath about not being able to edit or delete things they've said and now regret 9) Both have conducted straw polls, only to have their split personalities vote in them as proof that the voices in their head are in actuality other real people that agree with them 10) Both are quick to call anyone who disagrees with them, "Satan worshippers" as they pump their fists in triumph
August 17, 20224 yr Author 45 minutes ago, VanHammersly said: I'm working on an article called "10 Similarities Between Procus and the Homeless Guy I Just Saw Taking a Sheet in a Storm Drain". I'll post when I get a minute. We're waiting to see your article - but we all know you don't understand what the word similarities means
August 17, 20224 yr 3 minutes ago, Procus said: We're waiting to see your article - but we all know you don't understand what the word similarities means
August 17, 20224 yr 3 minutes ago, Boogyman said: He sure has been extra salty since the mods wouldn't let him delete a topic he was getting wrecked in.
August 17, 20224 yr Author 1 hour ago, we_gotta_believe said: Biden's campaign team will have the easiest job ever.
August 17, 20224 yr 14 minutes ago, Procus said: We're waiting to see your article - but we all know you don't understand what the word similarities means I was just gonna come up with 10 different ways to call you an incontinent lunatic but wgb did a much better job. 50 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said: 1) Both say things like "I'm not a Trump Supporter but the election sure seemed fishy to me." 2) Both have a cardboard box strapped to their hip with the word "ivermectin" scribbled across the front in black sharpie 3) Both proclaim they're "lawyers" and can provide expert legal analysis on command 4) Both know people who got the jab and died a week later 5) Both own "Members- Only" jackets 6) Both have an affinity for various equestrian sports and can be seen on Sunday mornings galloping in the park on all fours 7) Both don't believe in literally every conspiracy theory ever concocted, but are just eager to ask questions because they know the man doesn't want them to know the truth 8.) Both mutter things under their breath about not being able to edit or delete things they've said and now regret 9) Both have conducted straw polls, only to have their split personalities vote in them as proof that the voices in their head are in actuality other real people that agree with them 10) Both are quick to call anyone who disagrees with them, "Satan worshippers" as they pump their fists in triumph
August 17, 20224 yr There have been a lot of murders in this forum recently. Could a surreal killer be at large? I'm just asking questions.
August 17, 20224 yr Author So the Post article that the Inquirer picked up says Trump is having difficulty finding good lawyers to represent him. Now I'm sure the herd here will have a good laugh over this and say its proof that Trump is bad orange man. Truth be told, lawyers routinely have no problem representing scumbags who commit violent crimes. If in fact he's having trouble retaining counsel, it's for fear of retaliation from the left. Former president Donald Trump is rushing to hire seasoned lawyers. But he keeps hearing ‘No.’ "Everyone is saying no," said a prominent Republican lawyer, who like some others spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss confidential conversations. Former president Donald Trump.DOUG MILLS / Getty Images by Isaac Arnsdorf, Josh Dawsey, Carol D. Leonnig, Jacqueline Alemany, and Rosalind S. Helderman, Washington Post Published 53 minutes ago Former president Donald Trump and close aides have spent the eight days since the FBI searched his Florida home rushing to assemble a team of respected defense lawyers. But the answer they keep hearing is "no.” The struggle to find expert legal advice puts Trump in a bind as he faces potential criminal exposure from a records dispute with the National Archives that escalated into a federal investigation into possible violations of the Espionage Act and other statutes. "Everyone is saying no," said a prominent Republican lawyer, who like some others spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss confidential conversations. » READ MORE: Pence tells GOP to stop lashing out at FBI over Trump search ADVERTISEMENT 8.1M 582 POLITICO's 22nd EU Studies and Career Fair - 2021 - Highlights _ POLITICO Live Trump is no stranger to legal proceedings, and his scramble to hire lawyers in the face of an ominous federal probe recalls his predicament in the summer of 2017, when he was under scrutiny from special counsel Robert Mueller in the Russia probe. Once again, Trump is struggling to find a veteran criminal defense lawyer with a strong track record of dealing with the Justice Department in a sprawling, multipronged investigation. Longtime confidants and advisers of Trump have grown extremely worried about Trump's current stable of lawyers, noting that most of them have little to no experience in cases of this type, according to two people familiar with the internal discussions. SPONSORED CONTENT 4 Flood Facts About the Risk That Hurricane Season Brings by National Flood Insurance Program Taylor Budowich, a Trump spokesman, defended the quality of the former president's legal team in a statement Tuesday night, pointing to former federal prosecutors Evan Corcoran and James Trusty. "The President's lead counsel in relation to the raid of his home, Jim Trusty and Evan Corcoran, have decades of prosecutorial experience and have litigated some of the most complex cases in American history," Budowich said. "President Trump is represented by some of the strongest attorneys in the country, and any suggestion otherwise is only driven by envy." ADVERTISEMENT » READ MORE: Rudy Giuliani faces grand jury in Georgia 2020 election probe Jon Sale, a prominent Florida defense attorney who worked on the Watergate prosecution team and said he turned down representing Trump last week because he did not have enough time to devote to the case, said "the Trump team needs a first-rate, highly experienced federal criminal practitioner." "You have to evaluate whether you want to take it," Sale said. "It's not like a DUI. It's representing the former president of the United States - and maybe the next one - in what's one of the highest-visibility cases ever." Ordinarily, the prestige and publicity of representing a former president, as well as the new and complex legal issues at stake in this case, would attract high-powered attorneys. But Trump's search is being hampered by his divisiveness, as well as his reputation for stiffing vendors and ignoring advice. ADVERTISEMENT "In olden days, he would tell firms representing him was a benefit because they could advertise off it. Today it's not the same," said Michael Cohen, a former lawyer for Trump who was convicted of tax evasion, false statements, campaign finance violations and lying to Congress in 2018. "He's also a very difficult client in that he's always pushing the envelope, he rarely listens to sound legal advice, and he wants you to do things that are not appropriate, ethically or legally." Then-President Donald Trump leaves an event in 2019.OLIVIER DOULIERY / Abaca Press One lawyer told a story from early in Trump's presidency of his legal team urging him against tweeting about the Mueller probe, only to find he'd tweeted about it before they got to the end of the West Wing driveway. Several people said Trump was nearly impossible to represent and that it would be unclear if they would ever get paid. People familiar with the search for legal help said the effort includes Susie Wiles, a close adviser to Trump, and attorney Christina Bobb, who was present at Mar-a-Lago during the search and signed for the list of documents taken. Former campaign adviser Boris Epshteyn is taking a prominent role, and former White House aide Kash Patel is advising informally. Patel is raising money for a "legal offense" fund by selling merchandise such as tank tops and beanies emblazoned with the logo "K$H." ADVERTISEMENT "You get these guys who just live to be around him, and mistakes get made," a lawyer who isn't part of the team said. "These guys just want to make him happy." Bobb was previously a host on the far-right, pro-Trump television network One America News. At OAN, Bobb covered the Arizona Republican Party's review of 2020 ballots - which ultimately confirmed Joe Biden's win in the state - while also raising money for the effort and conferring with Trump advisers, The Washington Post has reported. » READ MORE: Former president Donald Trump’s secrets: How a records dispute led the FBI to search Mar-a-Lago Bobb's prior legal experience at the federal level consists mainly of a handful of trademark infringement cases on behalf of CrossFit during a stint at a San Diego law firm. She did not respond to requests for comment. ADVERTISEMENT Trump's other lawyer currently based in Florida is Lindsey Halligan, whose practice, according to a professional biography, focuses on insurance claims at residential and commercial properties. She was admitted to the Florida bar in 2014. A search of federal court records found no filings under her name. She did not respond to requests for comment. Trump is also being represented in the records dispute by Alina Habba, who leads a three-attorney firm with an office near Trump's golf club in Bedminster, N.J. Her professional experience includes serving as general counsel to a parking garage company. Last year, Habba started representing Trump in several cases including defending him from a defamation claim by the writer E. Jean Carroll, who accused him of a decades-old sexual assault; suing the New York Times and Trump's niece, Mary L. Trump; and suing 2016 opponent Hillary Clinton, the Democratic National Committee and other perceived enemies, alleging a conspiracy to harm Donald Trump through the Russia scandal. Habba did not respond to requests for comment. Others on the team have relatively more experience with federal criminal probes. Trusty formerly served in the Justice Department's criminal division and headed the organized crime and gang section. He has recently represented clients accused of financial fraud, defrauding the U.S. Department of Agriculture and trading in counterfeit military uniforms. He referred questions to Trump's spokesman. Corcoran is a former federal prosecutor viewed by Trump aides as a serious and experienced attorney. His recent clients include a former Capitol Police officer accused of obstructing the Jan. 6 investigation by telling a riot suspect to remove Facebook posts, and a Pennsylvania man who pleaded guilty to participating in the riot and was sentenced to 60 days in prison. Corcoran also represented former Trump adviser Steve Bannon in his contempt trial for defying a House subpoena in the Jan. 6 probe. Bannon was convicted in July. Some of Trump's interactions with the Justice Department have also been handled by John Rowley, another former federal prosecutor now at his own firm, Politico has reported. Rowley didn't respond to requests for comment. In another potential complication, any lawyer who made assurances to the FBI on Trump's behalf could have their own legal exposure or become a witness in the case. One letter signed by a lawyer on Trump's team was sent to the Justice Department in June suggesting that all classified material had been turned over, according to a person with direct knowledge of the matter. The existence of the letter was first reported by the New York Times. "Either the attorney acted in good faith on what turned out to be false factual representations made by Mr. Trump or someone else communicating on his behalf, in which case Mr. Trump or his proxy would have criminal jeopardy for false statements or obstruction of justice, or the attorney knowingly gave false assurances to the government," said David Laufman, the former Justice Department chief of the counterintelligence division, which is now investigating the classified records kept at Trump's home. "And it's hard to believe that a lawyer knowingly would have lied to the government about the continued presence of classified documents." The universe of experienced federal practitioners is not actually that extensive, and the case would likely monopolize their time to the exclusion of all other clients. Possible candidates and their firms may be further deterred by the controversy that would attach to defending Trump. "Good lawyers should have been working on this case for months," said Alan Dershowitz, the former Harvard Law School professor who has advised Trump in the past and said he hasn't been asked to get involved now. "He needs a big and good and very experienced defense team with experience trying cases." Dershowitz said he recommended Harvard colleague Ronald Sullivan, the faculty director of the Harvard Criminal Justice Institute and the Harvard Trial Advocacy Workshop. Sullivan said he hasn't heard from Trump's team. "They clearly need someone with federal trial experience, and someone familiar with high-profile cases who can stay on task and not be distracted by the media glare," Sullivan said. "The case itself presents a range of issues that would be of interest to a lot of good lawyers. Some lawyers may reasonably feel as though the public will conflate Mr. Trump's policy aims and positions with the lawyer's. In that way, many lawyers may be disinclined to expose themselves to the public opprobrium that would follow that sort of representation." Trump has long been a notoriously high-maintenance client. When he was trying to make his mark in Manhattan real estate as a young man, Trump had an especially demanding cadence with his lawyer, the late Roy Cohn. "Donald calls me 15 to 20 times a day. He is always asking, 'What is the status of this . . . and that?'" Cohn was quoted as saying in a Vanity Fair story about their attorney-client relationship. Many of the president's former lawyers, such as Pat Cipollone, Pat Philbin and Justin Clark are not expected to be involved in the investigation's defense, people familiar with the matter said. Cipollone has been interviewed already, one of these people said, a detail first reported by the New York Times. Two longtime Trump top legal advisers during the Mueller investigation, Jay Sekulow and Jane Raskin, are still close to the former president but not involved in his current legal team. Among other alumni of the defense to the Mueller investigation, Ty Cobb has become publicly critical of Trump, and former White House counsel Donald McGahn is no longer close with the former president. McGahn represented Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who is fighting a subpoena in a separate investigation into Trump and his allies in Georgia. Another former Trump lawyer, Emmet Flood, is now representing Marc Short, adviser to former vice president Mike Pence. "This is not good," one Trump confidant said of the president's lack of a high-profile white-collar defense lawyer. "Something big is going to pop. Somebody needs to be in charge." The Washington Post’s Ellen Nakashima contributed to this report. Published Aug. 17, 2022 Isaac Arnsdorf, Josh Dawsey, Carol D. Leonnig, Jacqueline Alemany, and Rosalind S. Helderman, Washington Post ADVERTISEMENT ADVERTISEMENT Phillies/MLB Rhys Hoskins leads the Phillies’ five-homer slugfest in an 11-4 rout of the Reds for franchise’s 10,000th win Scott Lauber Aug 16, 2022 Eagles/NFL Eagles practice: Dallas Goedert continues to star; Kenny Gainwell struggles; the safety issue Jeff McLane Aug 16, 2022 SPONSORED CONTENT If You Have Toenail Fungus Try This at Home (It's Genius!) by wellnessguide101.com Residential Real Estate Hundreds of new apartments are coming to West Philly, a century after its last building boom Jake Blumgart Aug 17, 2022
August 17, 20224 yr 22 minutes ago, Procus said: So the Post article that the Inquirer picked up says Trump is having difficulty finding good lawyers to represent him. Now I'm sure the herd here will have a good laugh over this and say its proof that Trump is bad orange man. Truth be told, lawyers routinely have no problem representing scumbags who commit violent crimes. If in fact he's having trouble retaining counsel, it's for fear of retaliation from the left. Former president Donald Trump is rushing to hire seasoned lawyers. But he keeps hearing ‘No.’ "Everyone is saying no," said a prominent Republican lawyer, who like some others spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss confidential conversations. Former president Donald Trump.DOUG MILLS / Getty Images by Isaac Arnsdorf, Josh Dawsey, Carol D. Leonnig, Jacqueline Alemany, and Rosalind S. Helderman, Washington Post Published 53 minutes ago Former president Donald Trump and close aides have spent the eight days since the FBI searched his Florida home rushing to assemble a team of respected defense lawyers. But the answer they keep hearing is "no.” The struggle to find expert legal advice puts Trump in a bind as he faces potential criminal exposure from a records dispute with the National Archives that escalated into a federal investigation into possible violations of the Espionage Act and other statutes. "Everyone is saying no," said a prominent Republican lawyer, who like some others spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss confidential conversations. » READ MORE: Pence tells GOP to stop lashing out at FBI over Trump search ADVERTISEMENT 8.1M 582 POLITICO's 22nd EU Studies and Career Fair - 2021 - Highlights _ POLITICO Live Trump is no stranger to legal proceedings, and his scramble to hire lawyers in the face of an ominous federal probe recalls his predicament in the summer of 2017, when he was under scrutiny from special counsel Robert Mueller in the Russia probe. Once again, Trump is struggling to find a veteran criminal defense lawyer with a strong track record of dealing with the Justice Department in a sprawling, multipronged investigation. Longtime confidants and advisers of Trump have grown extremely worried about Trump's current stable of lawyers, noting that most of them have little to no experience in cases of this type, according to two people familiar with the internal discussions. SPONSORED CONTENT 4 Flood Facts About the Risk That Hurricane Season Brings by National Flood Insurance Program Taylor Budowich, a Trump spokesman, defended the quality of the former president's legal team in a statement Tuesday night, pointing to former federal prosecutors Evan Corcoran and James Trusty. "The President's lead counsel in relation to the raid of his home, Jim Trusty and Evan Corcoran, have decades of prosecutorial experience and have litigated some of the most complex cases in American history," Budowich said. "President Trump is represented by some of the strongest attorneys in the country, and any suggestion otherwise is only driven by envy." ADVERTISEMENT » READ MORE: Rudy Giuliani faces grand jury in Georgia 2020 election probe Jon Sale, a prominent Florida defense attorney who worked on the Watergate prosecution team and said he turned down representing Trump last week because he did not have enough time to devote to the case, said "the Trump team needs a first-rate, highly experienced federal criminal practitioner." "You have to evaluate whether you want to take it," Sale said. "It's not like a DUI. It's representing the former president of the United States - and maybe the next one - in what's one of the highest-visibility cases ever." Ordinarily, the prestige and publicity of representing a former president, as well as the new and complex legal issues at stake in this case, would attract high-powered attorneys. But Trump's search is being hampered by his divisiveness, as well as his reputation for stiffing vendors and ignoring advice. ADVERTISEMENT "In olden days, he would tell firms representing him was a benefit because they could advertise off it. Today it's not the same," said Michael Cohen, a former lawyer for Trump who was convicted of tax evasion, false statements, campaign finance violations and lying to Congress in 2018. "He's also a very difficult client in that he's always pushing the envelope, he rarely listens to sound legal advice, and he wants you to do things that are not appropriate, ethically or legally." Then-President Donald Trump leaves an event in 2019.OLIVIER DOULIERY / Abaca Press One lawyer told a story from early in Trump's presidency of his legal team urging him against tweeting about the Mueller probe, only to find he'd tweeted about it before they got to the end of the West Wing driveway. Several people said Trump was nearly impossible to represent and that it would be unclear if they would ever get paid. People familiar with the search for legal help said the effort includes Susie Wiles, a close adviser to Trump, and attorney Christina Bobb, who was present at Mar-a-Lago during the search and signed for the list of documents taken. Former campaign adviser Boris Epshteyn is taking a prominent role, and former White House aide Kash Patel is advising informally. Patel is raising money for a "legal offense" fund by selling merchandise such as tank tops and beanies emblazoned with the logo "K$H." ADVERTISEMENT "You get these guys who just live to be around him, and mistakes get made," a lawyer who isn't part of the team said. "These guys just want to make him happy." Bobb was previously a host on the far-right, pro-Trump television network One America News. At OAN, Bobb covered the Arizona Republican Party's review of 2020 ballots - which ultimately confirmed Joe Biden's win in the state - while also raising money for the effort and conferring with Trump advisers, The Washington Post has reported. » READ MORE: Former president Donald Trump’s secrets: How a records dispute led the FBI to search Mar-a-Lago Bobb's prior legal experience at the federal level consists mainly of a handful of trademark infringement cases on behalf of CrossFit during a stint at a San Diego law firm. She did not respond to requests for comment. ADVERTISEMENT Trump's other lawyer currently based in Florida is Lindsey Halligan, whose practice, according to a professional biography, focuses on insurance claims at residential and commercial properties. She was admitted to the Florida bar in 2014. A search of federal court records found no filings under her name. She did not respond to requests for comment. Trump is also being represented in the records dispute by Alina Habba, who leads a three-attorney firm with an office near Trump's golf club in Bedminster, N.J. Her professional experience includes serving as general counsel to a parking garage company. Last year, Habba started representing Trump in several cases including defending him from a defamation claim by the writer E. Jean Carroll, who accused him of a decades-old sexual assault; suing the New York Times and Trump's niece, Mary L. Trump; and suing 2016 opponent Hillary Clinton, the Democratic National Committee and other perceived enemies, alleging a conspiracy to harm Donald Trump through the Russia scandal. Habba did not respond to requests for comment. Others on the team have relatively more experience with federal criminal probes. Trusty formerly served in the Justice Department's criminal division and headed the organized crime and gang section. He has recently represented clients accused of financial fraud, defrauding the U.S. Department of Agriculture and trading in counterfeit military uniforms. He referred questions to Trump's spokesman. Corcoran is a former federal prosecutor viewed by Trump aides as a serious and experienced attorney. His recent clients include a former Capitol Police officer accused of obstructing the Jan. 6 investigation by telling a riot suspect to remove Facebook posts, and a Pennsylvania man who pleaded guilty to participating in the riot and was sentenced to 60 days in prison. Corcoran also represented former Trump adviser Steve Bannon in his contempt trial for defying a House subpoena in the Jan. 6 probe. Bannon was convicted in July. Some of Trump's interactions with the Justice Department have also been handled by John Rowley, another former federal prosecutor now at his own firm, Politico has reported. Rowley didn't respond to requests for comment. In another potential complication, any lawyer who made assurances to the FBI on Trump's behalf could have their own legal exposure or become a witness in the case. One letter signed by a lawyer on Trump's team was sent to the Justice Department in June suggesting that all classified material had been turned over, according to a person with direct knowledge of the matter. The existence of the letter was first reported by the New York Times. "Either the attorney acted in good faith on what turned out to be false factual representations made by Mr. Trump or someone else communicating on his behalf, in which case Mr. Trump or his proxy would have criminal jeopardy for false statements or obstruction of justice, or the attorney knowingly gave false assurances to the government," said David Laufman, the former Justice Department chief of the counterintelligence division, which is now investigating the classified records kept at Trump's home. "And it's hard to believe that a lawyer knowingly would have lied to the government about the continued presence of classified documents." The universe of experienced federal practitioners is not actually that extensive, and the case would likely monopolize their time to the exclusion of all other clients. Possible candidates and their firms may be further deterred by the controversy that would attach to defending Trump. "Good lawyers should have been working on this case for months," said Alan Dershowitz, the former Harvard Law School professor who has advised Trump in the past and said he hasn't been asked to get involved now. "He needs a big and good and very experienced defense team with experience trying cases." Dershowitz said he recommended Harvard colleague Ronald Sullivan, the faculty director of the Harvard Criminal Justice Institute and the Harvard Trial Advocacy Workshop. Sullivan said he hasn't heard from Trump's team. "They clearly need someone with federal trial experience, and someone familiar with high-profile cases who can stay on task and not be distracted by the media glare," Sullivan said. "The case itself presents a range of issues that would be of interest to a lot of good lawyers. Some lawyers may reasonably feel as though the public will conflate Mr. Trump's policy aims and positions with the lawyer's. In that way, many lawyers may be disinclined to expose themselves to the public opprobrium that would follow that sort of representation." Trump has long been a notoriously high-maintenance client. When he was trying to make his mark in Manhattan real estate as a young man, Trump had an especially demanding cadence with his lawyer, the late Roy Cohn. "Donald calls me 15 to 20 times a day. He is always asking, 'What is the status of this . . . and that?'" Cohn was quoted as saying in a Vanity Fair story about their attorney-client relationship. Many of the president's former lawyers, such as Pat Cipollone, Pat Philbin and Justin Clark are not expected to be involved in the investigation's defense, people familiar with the matter said. Cipollone has been interviewed already, one of these people said, a detail first reported by the New York Times. Two longtime Trump top legal advisers during the Mueller investigation, Jay Sekulow and Jane Raskin, are still close to the former president but not involved in his current legal team. Among other alumni of the defense to the Mueller investigation, Ty Cobb has become publicly critical of Trump, and former White House counsel Donald McGahn is no longer close with the former president. McGahn represented Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who is fighting a subpoena in a separate investigation into Trump and his allies in Georgia. Another former Trump lawyer, Emmet Flood, is now representing Marc Short, adviser to former vice president Mike Pence. "This is not good," one Trump confidant said of the president's lack of a high-profile white-collar defense lawyer. "Something big is going to pop. Somebody needs to be in charge." The Washington Post’s Ellen Nakashima contributed to this report. Published Aug. 17, 2022 Isaac Arnsdorf, Josh Dawsey, Carol D. Leonnig, Jacqueline Alemany, and Rosalind S. Helderman, Washington Post ADVERTISEMENT ADVERTISEMENT Phillies/MLB Rhys Hoskins leads the Phillies’ five-homer slugfest in an 11-4 rout of the Reds for franchise’s 10,000th win Scott Lauber Aug 16, 2022 Eagles/NFL Eagles practice: Dallas Goedert continues to star; Kenny Gainwell struggles; the safety issue Jeff McLane Aug 16, 2022 SPONSORED CONTENT If You Have Toenail Fungus Try This at Home (It's Genius!) by wellnessguide101.com Residential Real Estate Hundreds of new apartments are coming to West Philly, a century after its last building boom Jake Blumgart Aug 17, 2022 5 hours ago, Procus said: I see that’s quite the productive life you are living
August 18, 20224 yr 7 hours ago, Diehardfan said: What is the difference in your mind? Yeah, it's experience and knowledge, but that can come with time. Some people have been doing it since they were kids. They can still have the "big picture" in mind. The difference honestly is talent and commitment to it as a craft or as something to pay the bills. I've worked with people who had masters degrees in CS but whose approach to software development was largely in high level disciplines who lacked the practical abilities to actually be good at the job. And I've worked with autodidacts who had great practical abilities within their lane but had high blind spots that handicapped them. My background is in actual engineering and I started out as a self taught software guy from a young age who switched to comp sci after starting out in ME. Personally I think it's a crazy perfect storm that worked out for me. Both self-taughts and college educated in my industry both suffer from the same issue: a level of hubris invited by relatively easy levels of income that come with basic ability. A little bit of success can be very dangerous, and Dunning-Kruger is rampant in IT.
Create an account or sign in to comment