He might have worked pro bono, but he still needs evidence of an engagement.Īfter reading Reinhart’s Order I’m more than convinced the DoJ should appeal the decision. What Cheseboro’s filing does not provide, though, is an affidavit to support his claim that he was retained by the Trump campaign (or other relevant entity) to provide legal services (and their scope), or that he was working for and under the authority of someone who was. He wants a a hearing to determine the scope of questioning.
#Redacted example professional#
A NY judge has ordered Cheseboro to appear before it on August 30thĬheseboro, like Brian Kemp, is resisting, claiming in a filing in Georgia that, in his case, A/C privilege and a broader duty of confidentiality owed to clients under state codes of professional conduct would preclude him from answering most questions the DA might ask. Do it the right and normal way.Įrstwhile lawyer Kenneth Cheseboro, friend of John Eastman and co-author of the plan to get Mike Pence not to certify the votes regarding Joe Biden’s victory (and to enable Trump to stay in office), was subpoenaed by the Fulton County, GA, DA to appear before her special grand jury. The voyeuristic public, and press, thinks they have an interest because Trump. And if Reinhart grants any “redacted version”, DOJ should appeal immediately and fully. Yes, this example is from CAND, not SDFL, but it is exactly what ought be handed over to Reinhart. In the meantime, I have a proposed example of what DOJ should submit to Reinhart. Is his willingness to even entertain a “redacted version” sound under such threat? His decision will yield the answer to that question. Why? Because that it how it is done, and properly so. Unless DOJ is going to capitulate to the clicks and reads voyeurism of the overly exuberant political press, nothing whatsoever should be released unless and until charges are filed against some defendant, whether it be Trump or otherwise. The last sentence of that quote is the key. But in his order, Reinhart emphasized that he may ultimately agree with prosecutors that any redactions would be so extensive that they would render the document useless. Reinhart ruled last week that he would consider unsealing portions of the affidavit after conferring with the Justice Department and determining whether proposed redactions would be sufficient to protect the ongoing criminal investigation connected to the search. “I was - and am - satisfied that the facts sworn by the affiant are reliable,” Reinhart said in the order. Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart offered his assessment in a 13-page order memorializing his decision to consider whether to unseal portions of the affidavit, which describe the evidence the bureau relied on to justify the search of the former president’s home. The federal magistrate judge who authorized the warrant to search Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate emphasized Monday that he “carefully reviewed” the FBI’s sworn evidence before signing off and considers the facts contained in an accompanying affidavit to be “reliable.” As you may know, DOJ is ordered by Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart to submit a “suggested” redacted version of the warrant affidavit for the Mar-a-Lago search executed on August 8, 2022.
0 kommentar(er)
