#Renato Mariotti
Text
Judge Aileen Cannon on Thursday overruled the special master she appointed to review thousands of documents seized from Mar-a-Lago, shielding former President Donald Trump from addressing his claims that documents may have been "planted" or "declassified" in court.
Cannon, a Trump appointee in southern Florida, issued an order extending the timeline of the review after Trump's lawyers objected to the expedited schedule laid out by special master Raymond Dearie, who was chosen from a list proposed by Trump's lawyers. Under the new order, the review and any surrounding issues around Dearie's rulings "will almost certainly" stretch into next year, according to Politico.
Cannon, who has served on the bench for less than two years, also overruled Dearie, a Reagan appointee who has served for 36 years, on his requirement that Trump assert whether the FBI's inventory of seized items is accurate, effectively challenging his public claim that agents may have "planted" evidence.
"There shall be no separate requirement on Plaintiff at this stage, prior to the review of any of the Seized Materials, to lodge ex ante final objections to the accuracy of Defendant's Inventory, its descriptions, or its contents. The Court's Appointment Order did not contemplate that obligation," Cannon wrote.
She wrote that if any issues rise during the review "that require reconsideration of the Inventory or the need to object to its contents, the parties shall make those matters known to the Special Master for appropriate resolution and recommendation to this Court."
Cannon also rejected other parts of Dearie's plan for the review, giving Trump's lawyers additional weeks to assert whether they believe any documents are covered by attorney-client privilege or executive privilege.
"If Judge Cannon was going to continue calling every ball in Trump's favor, I'm not at all sure why she felt the need to appoint a special master to review the documents the government seized from Mar-a-Lago," tweeted Joyce Vance, a former U.S. attorney. "No real surprises here. The name of the game is delay. Judge Cannon countermanded Judge Dearie's streamlined schedule & helped Trump advance his usual delay game in litigation. That means it could be late December before DOJ can use documents it recovered from Mar-a-Lago."
Cannon previously came under criticism for repeatedly siding with Trump in the case. Cannon's initial order barred the Justice Department from continuing its criminal investigation into the documents and ordered documents marked classified to be included in the special master review and shared with Trump's lawyers. A federal appeals court overturned those rulings, arguing that she had abused her discretion and that Trump "not even attempted to show that he has a need to know the information contained in the classified documents."
Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe said that Cannon's order on Thursday was "clearly wrong."
"But she's a sideshow now that the Court of Appeals has lifted her injunction with respect to the classified documents," he tweeted. "On the eve of her stupidly extended deadline, DOJ should indict Trump and render her delays and game playing moot."
Former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti said the order was a "minor win" for Trump.
"But this doesn't change the difficult position Trump is in," he added. "He still has to take a position regarding every seized document."
Some legal experts criticized Cannon for repeatedly intervening on Trump's behalf.
"She's an embarrassment to the federal judiciary," wrote conservative attorney George Conway.
"Cannon's latest order has neither law nor reason on its side," tweeted former U.S. Attorney Harry Litman. "Judges never micromanage special masters this way," he said.
Former federal prosecutor Andrew Weissmann, who served on special counsel Bob Mueller's team, said that the order was "one more piece of evidence that she is completely unfit to serve on the bench."
"What does Donald Trump have on Judge Cannon or her husband?" Weissmann wrote. "Something is SO off in her decisions (and the court of appeals said as much) that it is impossible not to ask this question in all seriousness."
Read Cannon's full order below:
Cannon overrules Dearie by Igor Derysh on Scribd
#us politics#news#salon#donald trump#judge aileen cannon#11th circuit court of appeals#fbi raid#fbi#department of justice#judge raymond dearie#special master#mar a lago#top secret documents#classified documents#politico#twitter#tweet#Joyce Vance#Laurence Tribe#Renato Mariotti#George Conway#Harry Litman#Andrew Weissmann#scribd#2022
67 notes
·
View notes
Text
Experts say Trump’s Truth Social brag could backfire in court
Former President Donald Trump claimed on Truth Social that he has tons of cash days after his lawyers asked a court to stay his $454 million New York fraud judgment because he could not secure a bond.
“THROUGH HARD WORK, TALENT, AND LUCK, I CURRENTLY HAVE ALMOST FIVE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS IN CASH, A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF WHICH I INTENDED TO USE IN MY CAMPAIGN FOR PRESIDENT,” Trump claimed on…
View On WordPress
0 notes
Text
youtube
Trump is unable to make $464 million bond
0 notes
Text
Opera on YouTube 5
Nabucco
Teatro alla Scala, 1987 (Renato Bruson, Ghena Dimitrova; conducted by Riccardo Muti; no subtitles)
Teatro di San Carlo, 1997 (Renato Bruson, Lauren Flanigan; conducted by Paolo Carognani; no subtitles)
Ankara State Opera, 2006 (Eralp Kıyıcı, Nilgün Akkerman; conducted by Sunay Muratov; no subtitles)
St. Margarethen Opera Festival, 2007 (Igor Morosow, Gabriella Morigi; conducted by Ernst Märzendorfer; English subtitles)
Rome Opera, 2011 (Leo Nucci, Csilla Boross; conducted by Riccardo Muti; English and German subtitles)
Teatro Comunale di Bologna, 2013 (Vladimir Stoyanov, Anna Pirozzi; conducted by Michele Mariotti; Italian subtitles)
Rome Opera, 2013 (Luca Salsi, Tatiana Serjan; conducted by Riccardo Muti; no subtitles)
Gran Teatro Nacional, Perú, 2015 (Giuseppe Altomare, Rachele Stanisci; conducted by Fernando Valcárcel; Spanish subtitles)
Metropolitan Opera, 2017 (Plácido Domingo, Liudmyla Monastyrska; conducted by James Levine; Spanish subtitles)
Arena di Verona, 2017 (George Gagnidze, Susanna Branchini; conducted by Daniel Oren; English subtitles)
La Cenerentola (Cinderella)
Jean-Pierre Ponnelle studio film, 1981 (Frederica von Stade, Francisco Araiza, Paolo Montarsolo; conducted by Claudio Abbado; English subtitles)
Glyndebourne Festival Opera, 1983 (Kathleen Kuhlmann, Laurence Dale, Claudio Desderi; conducted by Donato Renzetti; no subtitles)
Salzburg Festival, 1988 (Ann Murray, Francisco Araiza, Walter Berry; conducted by Riccardo Chailly; English subtitles)
Tokyo Bunka Kaikan, 1991 (Lucia Valentini-Terrani, Toshiro Gorobe, Domenico Trimarchi; conducted by Antonello Allemandi; Japanese subtitles) – Act I, Act II
Houston Grand Opera, 1995 (Cecilia Bartoli, Raúl Giménez, Enzo Dara; conducted by Bruno Campanella; no subtitles)
Rossini Opera Festival, 2000 (Sonia Ganassi, Juan Diego Flórez, Bruno Praticó; conducted by Carlo Rizzi; Italian subtitles)
Gran Teatre del Liceu, 2008 (Joyce DiDonato, Juan Diego Flórez, Bruno de Simone; conducted by Patrick Summers; German subtitles)
Romeo Opera, 2015 (Serena Malfi, Juan Francisco Gatell, Alessandro Corbelli; conducted by Alejo Pérez; Italian and English subtitles)
Lille Opera, 2016 (Emily Fons, Taylor Stayton, Renato Girolami; conducted by Yves Parmentier; English subtitles)
Boboli Gardens, Florence, 2020 (Svetlina Stoyanova, Josh Lovell, Daniel Miroslaw; conducted by Sándor Károlyi; no subtitles)
Lucia di Lammermoor
Tokyo Bunka Kaikan, 1967 (Renata Scotto, Carlo Bergonzi; conducted by Bruno Bartoletti; English subtitles)
Mario Lanfranchi film, 1971 (Anna Moffo, Lajos Kosma; conducted by Carlo Felice Cillario; English subtitles)
Bregenz Festival, 1982 (Katia Ricciarelli, José Carreras; conducted by Lamberto Gardelli; no subtitles) – Part I, Part II
Opera Australia, 1986 (Joan Sutherland, Richard Greager; conducted by Richard Bonynge; English subtitles)
Teatro Carlo Felice, 2003 (Stefania Bonfadelli, Marcelo Álvarez; conducted by Patrick Fournillier; Japanese subtitles)
San Francisco Opera, 2009 (Natalie Dessay, Giuseppe Filianoti; conducted by Jean-Yves Ossonce; English subtitles)
Amarillo Opera, 2013 (Hanan Alattar, Eric Barry; conducted by Michael Ching; English subtitles)
Gran Teatre del Liceu, 2015 (Elena Mosuc, Juan Diego Flórez; conducted by Marco Armiliato; French subtitles)
Teatro Real de Madrid, 2018 (Lisette Oropesa, Javier Camerana; conducted by Daniel Oren; English subtitles)
Vienna State Opera, 2022 (Lisette Oropesa, Benjamin Bernheim; conducted by Evelino Pidó; English subtitles)
Il Trovatore
Claudio Fino studio film, 1957 (Mario del Monaco, Leyla Gencer, Fedora Barbieri, Ettore Bastianini; conducted by Fernando Previtali; English subtitles)
Wolfgang Nagel studio film, 1975 (Franco Bonisolli, Raina Kabaivanska, Viorica Cortez, Giorgio Zancanaro; conducted by Bruno Bartoletti; Japanese subtitles)
Vienna State Opera, 1978 (Plácido Domingo, Raina Kabaivanska, Fiorenza Cossotto, Piero Cappuccilli; conducted by Herbert von Karajan; no subtitles)
Opera Australia, 1983 (Kenneth Collins, Joan Sutherland, Lauris Elms, Jonathan Summers; conducted by Richard Bonynge, English subtitles)
Metropolitan Opera, 1988 (Luciano Pavarotti, Eva Marton, Dolora Zajick, Sherrill Milnes; conducted by James Levine; no subtitles)
Bavarian State Opera, 2013 (Jonas Kaufmann, Anja Harteros, Elena Manistinta, Alexey Markov; conducted by Paolo Carignani; English subtitles)
Temporada Lirica a Coruña, 2015 (Gregory Kunde, Angela Meade, Marianne Cornetti, Juan Jesús Rodriguez; conducted by Keri-Lynn Wilson; no subtitles)
Opéra Royal de Wallonie-Liége, 2018 (Fabio Sartori, Yolanda Auyanet, Violeta Urmana, Mario Cassi; conducted by Daniel Oren; French subtitles)
Arena di Verona, 2019 (Yusif Eyvazov, Anna Netrebko, Dolora Zajick, Luca Salsi; conducted by Pier Giorgio Morandi; German subtitles)
Teatro Verdi di Pisa, 2021 (Murat Karahan, Carolina López Moreno, Victória Pitts, Cesar Méndez; conducted by Marco Guidarini; no subtitles)
#opera#youtube#complete performances#nabucco#la cenerentola#lucia di lammermoor#il trovatore#giuseppe verdi#gioachino rossini#gaetano donizetti
23 notes
·
View notes
Link
Must-read Thread!
I’ll screenshot here, link above.
12 notes
·
View notes
Text
Donald Trump said Thursday that Americans will not “stand” for indictments against him regarding top secret documents he took from the White House — and ominously warned that criminal charges could trigger “big problems” never before seen.
Trump also declared that he issued a standing order to declassify everything he took from the White House. It’s a resurrected claim that even his attorneys haven’t presented in court filings — and one contradicted by several Trump administration officials.
Asked about possible indictments related to the several boxes of White House documents, including classified and even top secret files, stashed at Mar-a-Lago, Trump repeatedly told conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt on his program that Americans won’t “stand for it,” and that any charges would trigger “problems in this country the likes of which perhaps we’ve never seen before.”
When Hewitt asked him to detail what kind of problems, Trump responded: “I think they’d have big problems, big problems. I just don’t think they’d stand for it,” he added, referring to the public. “They will not sit still and stand for this ultimate of hoaxes.”
When Hewitt pointed out that the comments could be interpreted as an incitement to violence, Trump replied: “That’s not inciting. I’m just saying what my opinion is. I don’t think the people of this country would stand for it.”
In any case, even if he is indicted, Trump emphasized it would not stop him from running for the presidency in 2024. “If a thing like that happened, I would have no prohibition against running,” Trump told Hewitt, though he did not say he will run.
Hewitt also noted that Trump ally and former Pentagon Chief of Staff Kash Patel said he witnessed Trump “giving verbal orders to declassify the papers that ended up at Mar-a-Lago.”
“Do you remember making those orders?” Hewitt asked Trump.
“That’s correct,” the former President responded. “Not only that, I think it was other people also were there.” Trump also insisted he has “the absolute right to declassify, absolute.”
Though Patel has backed Trump’s claim of issuing a “standing order” to declassify documents the former President took from the White House, it has not been asserted in court documents by Trump’s lawyers. Patel appears to be the only one other than Trump who has insisted such an order existed.
CNN spoke last month with 18 White House officials in the Trump administration who all said they never heard of such an order.
Trump’s former National Security Adviser John Bolton and his former White House Chief of Staff John Kelly also said they never heard of any standing order concerning declassification, though they should have known if it existed.
“Nothing approaching an order that foolish was ever given,” Kelly told CNN.
Bolton told The New York Times last month that Trump’s claim about declassifying documents is “almost certainly a lie.”
“If he [Trump] were to say something like that, you would have to memorialize that, so that people would know it existed,” and it would then be subject to public record requests, he noted.
Trump’s attorneys have argued that Presidents have the power to declassify documents, and that some files confiscated by the FBI at Mar-a-Lago may no longer be classified. But they haven’t argued that Trump ordered the documents declassified. The former President “seeks to raise questions about the classification status of the records” but hasn’t asserted to the court — nor provided “any evidence” — that they were declassified, Justice Department attorneys argued in a court filing this week.
Presidents have the power to declassify information but must follow a process. Two years ago, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit flatly stated that “declassification, even by the President, must follow established procedures.”
Declassification cannot be done in secret. Former Obama administration Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson called such a concept “laughable” since “part and parcel of any act of declassification is communicating that act to all others who possess the same information.”
Declassified documents are treated very differently. For one thing, as Bolton pointed out, they’re subject to the Freedom of Information Act and can be accessed by the public. Former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti called Trump’s declaration Thursday that he declassified documents a “big error” that could trigger legal trouble for him.
“Staking out the position that he ‘declassified’ everything he brought to Mar-a-Lago may sound like it helps him, but actually it locks him into a story and makes it harder to pivot later if he is charged,” he tweeted Thursday.
#us politics#news#donald trump#mar a lago#fbi#fbi raid#top secret documents#classified documents#hugh hewitt#Kash Patel#John Bolton#cnn#John Kelly#The New York Times#department of justice#2nd Circuit court of appeals#Jeh Johnson#Renato Mariotti#twitter#tweet#declassification
18 notes
·
View notes
Link
0 notes
Text
Ex-Prosecutor Spots A Major Problem For Donald Trump That People Are Missing
New Post has been published on https://truckfump.life/2023/08/14/ex-prosecutor-trump-legal-challenges_n_64d9c9c9e4b01e7cf02720b1/
Ex-Prosecutor Spots A Major Problem For Donald Trump That People Are Missing
Renato Mariotti highlighted a “big challenge” for the former president’s legal team.
0 notes
Text
'Explosive' revelation in new indictment will be hard for Trump 'to explain away': legal expert - RawStory.com
According to former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti, the information contained in the superseding indictment against Donald Trump that was filed late Thursday contains an "explosive" revelation that the former president will be hard-pressed to blow off when he goes to trial...
0 notes
Text
Experts: Jack Smith’s latest move means Trump can’t use Judge Cannon to prevent pre-election trial | Salon.com
..."This means that Trump will be indicted in the January 6th investigation," former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti tweeted about the target letter. "This indictment will likely be brought in D.C. federal court, which means that the importance of Judge Aileen Cannon's rulings in the Mar-a-Lago case are diminished." MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin agreed that the implication of the likely indictment in D.C. is that even "if Cannon caves to Trump's demands not to set ANY trial date, she now can't single-handedly prevent a federal trial before Election Day. The federal judges in DC have handled [hundreds] of 1/6 cases rapidly—and his should be no exception."
0 notes
Link
1 note
·
View note
Text
1 note
·
View note
Text
In recent weeks, Smith has subpoenaed both former Vice President Mike Pence and then-White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, two figures with strong visibility into Trump’s actions leading up to and on the day of the deadly riot.
The Justice Department has also sought to pierce the attorney-client privilege connected to Trump’s lawyer in the Mar-a-Lago probe, Evan Corcoran, alleging he may have given legal advice in furtherance of a crime.
Approaching high-level targets is often a late-stage move for prosecutors, a sign the investigative stage of Smith’s Jan. 6 work could be winding down.
Meanwhile, Corcoran relays that the team will work with anyone involved in the probe who they believe may have committed criminal activity.
"We can draw a few obvious conclusions from it that are apparent: that Jack Smith is conducting a very aggressive investigation, and a subpoena to an attorney is itself an aggressive step that requires high levels of supervisory approval from the United States Department of Justice," said Renato Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor.
Pence has said he will challenge the subpoena, and it’s up to a federal judge to compel testimony from Corcoran.
Still, it’s a sign of progress in the dual probes, including the Jan. 6 investigation, which has been perceived as presenting a much more complex case for any possible prosecution of Trump.
The documents case largely relies on showing the willful retention of national defence information, something observers see as more straightforward given the lengthy battle to secure the return of classified records from Mar-a-Lago. A warrant to search the property also cited potential obstruction of justice.
Trump’s culpability for Jan. 6 is more complex, with possible statutes for prosecution requiring the demonstration of Trump’s intent.
“A lot of people believed that because the Mar-a-Lago case would be easier to prove, Smith would focus attention there and put the January 6 investigation on the back burner or second in line, and that has not been the case,” Mariotti said.
Danya Perry, a former federal prosecutor, said the moves also show the Mar-a-Lago probe into Trump has not been sidelined by the discovery of classified documents among the belongings of other former presidents.
The special counsel decided to hang it up, which I think some people thought he might when news came out about several other former White House officials having classified documents.
“That side of the ledger, the classified documents side, does seem to be focused on the potential obstruction issues given that he’s been trying to get testimony out of Corcoran.”
For his part, Pence is planning to roll out a novel legal strategy to sidestep the subpoena, one that hinges on his role on Jan. 6 as the presiding officer of the Senate.
His team is expected to argue that under his former position as president of the Senate, his work technically falls under the legislative branch, and he is therefore protected under the “speech and debate” clause of the Constitution, according to a source familiar with the former vice president’s plans.
Investigators likely want to speak to Pence about several meetings and conversations about whether the then-vice president had the authority to buck his ceremonial duty to certify the election.
Mariotti says asking about more widely attended meetings they may have discussed with prior witnesses allows them to “test the veracity of what he says” before asking about conversations exclusive to the vice president and Trump.
“The ordinary course would be to interview all those other people and then try to pursue Mike Pence with the knowledge he already has from others,” he said.
But Perry warned that the Pence subpoena is no guarantee that Smith has completed his work talking to other witnesses.
"Jack Smith was probably aware that they were going to invoke executive privilege, so he realized it would be a slog and maybe wanted to get the ball rolling," she said.
Trump and his supporters, in some ways, counter investigations or shape the public narrative around them. The president has routinely complained about donations to Democratic candidates.
Trump’s team has said it will assert executive privilege over any potential testimony by Pence in the case, and it may seek to do the same should Meadows testify.
One former Trump White House official told The Hill that the former president’s team is confident that revelations that President Biden had classified documents at his home and office from his time as vice president will help shield Trump from possible charges in that matter, despite differences in the Trump and Biden cases.
The former Trump official acknowledged Smith’s probe into Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election will likely hover over the former president until it concludes, and Democrats and even some Republicans backing other candidates are likely to wield it against Trump on the campaign trail.
But, the official argued, any suggestions that the investigation will end Trump’s candidacy or put him out of politics are just “wishes to cast.”
Spokespeople for Trump’s 2024 White House campaign did not respond to requests for comment.
“We’re just at the beginning, I think, of a bunch of fights that are going to play out in front of different courts and probably then travel up and down the court system,” she said, noting the potential for challenges from Pence, Trump, and Meadows.
This week, a judge allowed the partial release of a report compiled by a Georgia grand jury tasked with reviewing Trump’s interference in the state following the 2020 election.
Though the jurors determined the report should be released, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis warned that doing so could compromise the proceedings for “multiple” future defendants in a case where charging decisions are “imminent.”
Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney largely sided with Willis, determining that only the introduction and conclusion of the report should be released, along with one section discussing potential perjury that did not name any witnesses who appeared before the grand jury.
While the report’s three pages were slim on substantive details, they made two conclusions clear: there was no widespread fraud in the state that could have altered Trump’s loss there, and at least one witness may have lied to the grand jury.
0 notes
Last Seen Blogs
hearthflown
Reach for the stars, brave one
sasscasticlawstudent-blog
All About that Sass
bartonvaughan
The Blogging of Cabrera 500
cherylandjasonblossom
How dare you speak to us, Plebe?
ashlaykfan-blog
Untitled