Indeed, Trump’s response begins by arguing that the right to privacy means that a suspect under investigation cannot search his home without permission, even if law enforcement has a search warrant, and even if he owns the home. Inform in advance. And that whatever evidence the government finds of a crime cannot be taken away, no matter what. So there.
It is the reasonable expectation of privacy in one’s home that triggers the homeowner’s apparent standing to contest a search on those premises. To suggest that the seizure of allegedly “illegally possessed” items negates standing literally undermines the entire concept of Wong Sun’s “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine. In the strange assumption that, if the recovered property is potentially illegal to possess, the homeowner. Can never challenge the ground of intrusion.
This is a bold new expansion of privacy rights that many people will appreciate (including other criminals who have had illegal materials removed from their residences following the application of a valid search warrant obtained from a federal judge). The Wong Sun case mentioned in Trump’s response was specifically about research without A warrant, and its application here is worse than futile. Maybe Trump’s team thinks Cannon doesn’t know that. Maybe Trump’s team doesn’t know that.
Then comes the argument about Trump having standing to request a special master. It’s clear that Trump’s lawyers have just seen the meaning of “standing” as they include the law school’s definition. They then cite a few instances where special masters were appointed, each of which involved complications resulting from an attorney’s office finding. In fact, the first quote involves a search of Michael Cohen’s office. This may be where Trump got the idea that a special master would save him.
But after all this, and despite the passage of time about the court appointing a special master to search the law offices, the answer never comes to explain why. trump A special master should be awarded. Simply resting that the whole matter violated his Fourth Amendment rights, even if the search was conducted under the terms of the search warrant, amounts to the next two parts of the motion.
And that’s before the Trump team officially throws up their hands…
The movant does not address every misleading or incomplete statement of “fact” made by the Government in its Answer at this time on pages 3 through 14.
This “addressing every misleading or incomplete statement” is exactly the answer for. Here is Trump’s chance to show where the government is wrong. To provide evidence that the government is lying or exaggerating or misrepresenting what happened. But they cannot be disturbed. Maybe it’s because all three of Trump’s attorneys who signed off on this thing are actually prosecuting other cases at the same time.
However, there is one example that they address. in a way
However, the movant will highlight only one specific event — the June 3, 2022, meeting — is materially misrepresented in the government’s response.
That June 3, 2022 meeting came after the FBI filed a subpoena demanding Trump return the documents. At that meeting, agents and DOJ attorneys present were handed an envelope containing 38 classified documents, 17 of which were stamped “Top Secret.” They were also given a signed statement from Trump attorney Christina Bobb (whose name is notably missing from Wednesday’s response), saying that after a “painstaking search” at Mar-a-Lago There were no other classified documents.
The section doesn’t mention how the government “significantly misrepresented the meeting,” but eventually Trump’s team gets around to writing about that meeting.
A search warrant has been issued at the President’s house. It was held amid the standard give-and-take between former presidents and NARA regarding presidential library materials, and the movant literally allowed DOJ lawyers and FBI investigators to visit his home and provide security advice.
This should be the single best section of the entire filing. It’s just because… because. Not only does it leave out the word “former” when describing Trump’s position, it describes a process in which the DOJ is currently begging for the return of more than a year of classified material from the National Archives. Threatened to go to, actually going to. When Trump tried to hide behind executive privilege at the DOJ, the DOJ issued a subpoena, and the FBI eventually moved in after seeing evidence that the nature and number of classified documents Trump kept as “standard give-and-takes.” Lying about both. Take former presidents and NARA. What is missing from this claim is any reason to view it as a “standard”.
But that’s not the best part.
The next section says that Trump “authorized” the FBI to … “provide security advice.” By which Trump’s lawyers presumably mean that the FBI agents present advised Bob to secure a storage room containing records from the White House — records he did not allow them to see. It completely ignores that the actual purpose of the visit was to retrieve both the classified documents and the signed statement, both of which took place.
This is such a twisted view of events that it poses a serious threat to reason to follow. But Trump’s lawyers should be given a lot of credit: Essays will be written about what’s wrong with those two sentences.
But don’t worry. Just because Trump’s team left out the part where that meeting involved a big stack of high-level material and handing over a signed statement that was an outright lie, doesn’t mean it’s a complete confession. do not reach
Despite the government’s apparent desperation to avoid the PRA’s broad criteria in allowing President Trump to keep documents, Movant calls all potential future litigation within the narrow context of responding to the court’s order regarding the appointment of a special master. Rejected .
So Trump admitted that he had documents that fell under the restrictions of the Presidential Records Act. This is part one.
As a preliminary matter, certain conditions proposed by the movant are favorable
Govt. … The movant also agrees that it would be appropriate for the Special Master to obtain a Top Secret/SCI Security Clearance.
And Trump’s team agrees that any special master would require more than a top-secret clearance … even though Trump is also publicly claiming that he has declassified all of those documents. The response also noted that “… the government indicated that it had no objection other than to complain about the removal of some of Trump’s personal documents (i.e. multiple) located in desks in ’45 offices’ The documents … were present. The passport he was keeping with his classified documents).
What is to be learned from this response, other than that there is absolutely no precedent for the appointment of a special master to deal with issues of executive privilege, and that Trump has admitted to having highly classified material in his possession?
First, the document follows the precedent of all of Trump’s other legal filings in that it never mentions the idea that any of the documents have been declassified. That’s something Trump says publicly, but which is completely at odds with the filings his lawyers are making in court.
Second, despite devoting two entire sections of the answer to the idea of appointing a particular master, the answer does not actually provide a single example or reason why this master should be appointed. It also fails to clearly explain why the process outlined by the Justice Department is inadequate or how a special master would operate now that the FBI filter team has already gone through the documents.
Third, the document completely fails to address the false claim that Trump’s legal team submitted to the DOJ on June 3 and stated that “after a diligent search,” there were no more classified documents to hand over.
Fourth, not only is Bob’s name missing from the document, so is the attorney’s Christopher Keyes, the former Florida solicitor general and a former staff member of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, whom Trump appointed earlier this month to specifically represent him in the case. However, it features TV attorneys James Trusty and Evan Corcoran, neither of whom is licensed to practice in Florida, and both of whom are devoting more time to other matters than Trump.
Fifth, and perhaps most surprising, the response does not even attempt to refute the government’s claims that the documents were removed or hidden for interception purposes. The answer does not even include the word obstacle.
Trump’s team’s response is a ridiculous document. Not only is this understanding of Fourth Amendment rights outside of any concept of criminal law, it clearly fails to address the DOJ motion’s claims, hiding behind vague statements about breast-beating and “misbehavior.” are never filled by facts.
but then, every The document that Trump’s team filed with Canon is ridiculous. Cannon has had to come back to the team twice in the past, once when they filed incorrectly, another time after they filed a complaint that was seriously missing every element of the complaint, and they How to do it correctly was explained. But Cannon overruled them, and then said he was willing to grant Trump’s request despite everything wrong with his argument.
There is no guarantee that because this answer is empty, stupid, and inconsistent with logic, it will not be completely successful.