Liberal Forum
Archive
‹
Political Chat Rooms
‹
No Holds Barred Political Forum
‹
DOJ Misconduct Justifies The Dismissal Of Trump's Charges
DOJ Misconduct Justifies The Dismissal Of Trump's Charges
By Beekeeper
6 Jul 2023 6:34 am in No Holds Barred Political Forum
8 posts • Page 1 of 1
6 Jul 2023 6:34 am
You can bet that Judge Cannon ain't gonna be too happy with the DOJ on THIS ONE and is LIKELY to say "DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE!!
Sucks for all you LWNJs that your ATTEMPTS TO "Get Trump" have FAILED AGAIN!!!
Lost in the breathless headlines over the indictment of President Trump for alleged violations of the Espionage Act is a story that deserves much more attention than it has received thus far: the allegation that a senior official at the Department of Justice attempted to shake down Trump’s co-defendant’s lawyer. It is a scandal in the making that could result in the investigation of senior DOJ officials, which should lead to public congressional hearings, and that might even result in the entire case against Trump being dismissed.
Trump’s co-defendant is Waltine “Walt” Nauta, a Navy valet who served in Trump’s White House and who remained a personal aide to Trump after he left office. Several weeks ago, Nauta’s lawyer, a distinguished, highly-regarded Washington attorney named Stanley Woodward, leveled accusations against senior members of the Department of Justice, including DOJ Counterintelligence Chief Jay Bratt, who is now a part of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team of prosecutors. According to news reports, Woodward claimed in a sealed letter to D.C. District Chief Judge James Boasberg that, in a meeting to discuss Nauta’s case, Bratt indicated that Woodward’s application to be a D.C. Superior Court judge could be impacted if he could not get Nauta to testify against Trump.
If true, and I see no reason why Woodward would make such a threat up — and especially no reason why Woodward would risk his career by making such a representation to a federal judge — Bratt’s alleged misconduct could result in heavy sanctions, and is a potential ground for dismissal of the entire case against Nauta and Trump. Depending on what exactly was said, Bratt could even face criminal prosecution himself.In cases of flagrant prosecutorial misconduct, courts have the discretion to dismiss indictments altogether. If Woodward’s claims are proven, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon would be well within her rights to consider a dismissal here. The conduct claimed is perhaps unprecedented and certainly flagrant, amounting to nothing less than an effort by a high-ranking DOJ official to deprive a defendant of his Sixth Amendment right to counsel through inappropriate and potentially unlawful acts.
At the very least, Trump and Nauta deserve answers. Courts routinely allow discovery by the defense in cases of alleged prosecutorial misconduct — including depositions and requests for documents and communications — in order to determine the scope, breadth, and effects of any misconduct that occurred. The defense team in this case should seek testimony from Bratt to get to the bottom of what he said and why.
As importantly, defense counsel should also seek to subpoena any communications between Bratt and others in DOJ and the White House relating to Woodward’s judgeship application and Bratt’s approach to Woodward more generally. My assumption is that these communications will be eye-opening, and may reveal even more misconduct on the part of the DOJ, the special counsel’s team, and their political masters.The legal teams defending Trump and Nauta surely know all of this, and I am confident that they will pursue this and other lines of defense aggressively. But the American people also deserve to know the full details of misconduct by senior officials at the Department of Justice.
[...]
Sucks for all you LWNJs that your ATTEMPTS TO "Get Trump" have FAILED AGAIN!!!
Lost in the breathless headlines over the indictment of President Trump for alleged violations of the Espionage Act is a story that deserves much more attention than it has received thus far: the allegation that a senior official at the Department of Justice attempted to shake down Trump’s co-defendant’s lawyer. It is a scandal in the making that could result in the investigation of senior DOJ officials, which should lead to public congressional hearings, and that might even result in the entire case against Trump being dismissed.
Trump’s co-defendant is Waltine “Walt” Nauta, a Navy valet who served in Trump’s White House and who remained a personal aide to Trump after he left office. Several weeks ago, Nauta’s lawyer, a distinguished, highly-regarded Washington attorney named Stanley Woodward, leveled accusations against senior members of the Department of Justice, including DOJ Counterintelligence Chief Jay Bratt, who is now a part of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team of prosecutors. According to news reports, Woodward claimed in a sealed letter to D.C. District Chief Judge James Boasberg that, in a meeting to discuss Nauta’s case, Bratt indicated that Woodward’s application to be a D.C. Superior Court judge could be impacted if he could not get Nauta to testify against Trump.
If true, and I see no reason why Woodward would make such a threat up — and especially no reason why Woodward would risk his career by making such a representation to a federal judge — Bratt’s alleged misconduct could result in heavy sanctions, and is a potential ground for dismissal of the entire case against Nauta and Trump. Depending on what exactly was said, Bratt could even face criminal prosecution himself.In cases of flagrant prosecutorial misconduct, courts have the discretion to dismiss indictments altogether. If Woodward’s claims are proven, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon would be well within her rights to consider a dismissal here. The conduct claimed is perhaps unprecedented and certainly flagrant, amounting to nothing less than an effort by a high-ranking DOJ official to deprive a defendant of his Sixth Amendment right to counsel through inappropriate and potentially unlawful acts.
At the very least, Trump and Nauta deserve answers. Courts routinely allow discovery by the defense in cases of alleged prosecutorial misconduct — including depositions and requests for documents and communications — in order to determine the scope, breadth, and effects of any misconduct that occurred. The defense team in this case should seek testimony from Bratt to get to the bottom of what he said and why.
As importantly, defense counsel should also seek to subpoena any communications between Bratt and others in DOJ and the White House relating to Woodward’s judgeship application and Bratt’s approach to Woodward more generally. My assumption is that these communications will be eye-opening, and may reveal even more misconduct on the part of the DOJ, the special counsel’s team, and their political masters.The legal teams defending Trump and Nauta surely know all of this, and I am confident that they will pursue this and other lines of defense aggressively. But the American people also deserve to know the full details of misconduct by senior officials at the Department of Justice.
[...]
6 Jul 2023 6:35 am
Make no mistake, this is a huge deal. Bratt’s conduct may even fall within the ambit of federal criminal statutes. Depending on what exactly was said, Bratt’s conduct could constitute attempted witness tampering in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(1), attempted federal bribery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 201(b)(3), attempted extortion by a federal official in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 872, or attempted subornation of perjury in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1622.
6 Jul 2023 7:51 am
Go **** your fake narrative....razoo » 06 Jul 2023, 7:19 am » wrote: ↑ Trump and MAGA and the Fake Republican Party is Justification For Prosecution as is demonstrated by their efforts to over throw the USA by way of insurrection and Treason activities on Jan 6th....... which is still on the table every day on capitol hill.
6 Jul 2023 12:38 pm
You only show the world that your entire mission in life is to do whatever it takes to "get Trump", including the MOST VILE usurping of the Constitution in order to achieve your ends. Its idiots like you that deserve to be spit roasted ALIVE before you are incinerated.razoo » 06 Jul 2023, 7:19 am » wrote: ↑ Trump and MAGA and the Fake Republican Party is Justification For Prosecution as is demonstrated by their efforts to over throw the USA by way of insurrection and Treason activities on Jan 6th....... which is still on the table every day on capitol hill.
7 Jul 2023 10:28 am
7 Jul 2023 10:33 am
According to Bill Barr, who Trump chose to be Attorney General, Trump is toast.
He is a lying incompetent conman that has been breaking laws and screwing others all his miserable life and his sorry *** belongs in prison!
He is a lying incompetent conman that has been breaking laws and screwing others all his miserable life and his sorry *** belongs in prison!
7 Jul 2023 10:52 am
The source said Woodward alleges that Bratt had with him a folder of information related to Woodward’s bid for a judgeship and told him, “I didn’t take you for a Trump guy.” [Idle attorney banter]
“The implication was that the judge thing would go badly for him if his client didn’t cooperate,” the source said. [actually, it was an INFERENCE apparently taken by Woodward. Only Bratt could tell what, if anything he was implying]
Records show that Trump’s Save America PAC has paid fees to Woodward and his partner, Stan Brand, who represent a number of witnesses in the special counsel investigations. Brand has said there is nothing inappropriate about that.
Even if Woodward’s allegations are true — the Justice Department is expected to dispute them — legal experts say it is not clear they would have an impact on any possible prosecution of Trump, who announced his White House bid in November. But the allegation is consistent with a strategy by Trump’s legal team to raise questions about prosecutorial tactics.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald ... -rcna88472
“The implication was that the judge thing would go badly for him if his client didn’t cooperate,” the source said. [actually, it was an INFERENCE apparently taken by Woodward. Only Bratt could tell what, if anything he was implying]
Records show that Trump’s Save America PAC has paid fees to Woodward and his partner, Stan Brand, who represent a number of witnesses in the special counsel investigations. Brand has said there is nothing inappropriate about that.
Even if Woodward’s allegations are true — the Justice Department is expected to dispute them — legal experts say it is not clear they would have an impact on any possible prosecution of Trump, who announced his White House bid in November. But the allegation is consistent with a strategy by Trump’s legal team to raise questions about prosecutorial tactics.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald ... -rcna88472
7 Jul 2023 11:00 am
WASH DC is a chaotic wreck.....
Putin ran the White House from 2016-2020
And 2021-2023 Coke-Heads run the White House.
Putin ran the White House from 2016-2020
And 2021-2023 Coke-Heads run the White House.
8 posts • Page 1 of 1
Who is online
In total there are 4825 users online :: 4 registered, 12 bots, and 4809 guests
Bots: proximic, ADmantX, aiohttp, YandexBot, Googlebot, Mediapartners-Google, facebookexternalhit, curl/7, bingbot, CriteoBot, Applebot, Baiduspider