Court rejects Trump’s urgent bid to keep lawyer’s records from special counsel

[onthedarkside]

 

A federal appeals court has rejected Donald Trump’s bid to prevent special counsel Jack Smith from obtaining key documents from a lawyer for the former president related to the handling of sensitive national security records discovered at Trump’s Florida home last year.

 

The ruling effectively permits the Justice Department to circumvent Trump’s attorney-client privilege after a lower-court judge found that the documents likely contain evidence of a crime, that finding by U.S. District Court Judge Beryl Howell on Friday triggers the “crime-fraud” exception to the usual attorney-client secrecy, the judge ruled.

 

Trump’s bid to appeal Howell’s ruling unfolded with extraordinary speed on Tuesday and overnight into Wednesday.

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/03/22/trump-court-rejects-special-counsel-00088403

 

[OneMoreFarang]

1 hour ago, onthedarkside said:

The ruling effectively permits the Justice Department to circumvent Trump’s attorney-client privilege

The privilege is restricted.

If the client and lawyer agree to commit a crime together then that is not covered by that principle. 

[Chomper Higgot]

The most remarkable thing about this is the speed at which the court has dealt with the appeal.

 

Trump isn’t getting to run out the clock.

 

Jack be nimble, Jack be quick.

 

 

[LosLobo]

Another court rejection.......

 

Trump has a very busy court agenda.

 

With so many irons in the fire, something will eventually stick.

 

With this type of defence I am sure it will.

 

During the deposition, "he (Trump) misidentified a decades-old photograph of her (Jean Carroll) as one of his ex-wives",

 

then 

 

"In the deposition, Trump was dismissive of Carroll’s claims, saying: 'Physically she’s not my type".

 

Obviously both statements are mutually exclusive.

 

 

Trump loses last bid to keep key evidence out of rape trial (nbcnews.com)

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

The privilege is restricted.

If the client and lawyer agree to commit a crime together then that is not covered by that principle. 

Well, to be more accurate, it doesn't really matter if the attorney actually conspires or not.. All that matters is that there is strong evidence of a crime. So whether Trump misled his attorney or conspired with his attorney, the likelihood of an underlying crime is strong. I suppose it's even possible that Corcoran drafted the document without Trump's input. But for obvious reasons, that seems overwhelmingly unlikely. And even then, that would be an underlying crime.

[klauskunkel]

at least he can still plead dementia...

[Skeptic7]

Slimy Don may be running out of time...and slime.