2. A key question I'd bet federal prosecutors asked Patel:
Were you acting as an agent of, or in concert with, Donald J. Trump when you described, repeatedly, Trump's plan to publicly disseminate the documents.
2. As Judge Dearie signaled, Trump's counsel are claiming that documents that they and DOJ agree are PERSONAL records are subject to executive privilege.
As I said on @OutFrontCNN earlier this week, that's a metaphysical impossibility.
Here's the new DOJ filing saying same.👇
3. This one is more debatable, but a powerful way for DOJ to frame it:
"Plaintiff may not assert the Executive Branch’s privilege to withhold documents from itself... The illogic and absence of any authority to invoke Executive Privilege against the privilege holder is fatal..."
Looks like bungling missteps by Trump counsel in MAL case
1. They apparently asserted the same document is subject to executive privilege (meaning it must be a gov doc) and is personal (meaning it must not be a govt doc)
- What are the intelligence community's equities in deciding whether and how to bring a criminal case involving such highly classified material?
- Doesn't Presidential Records Act and Obama Executive Order explicitly allow for executive privilege claim by FPOTUS?
3/
- What are differences between individuals with first-hand information serving as anonymous sources for reporters vs. their serving as witnesses for prosecutors? Different incentives, prospect of serving as both, etc.
- What are strengths and weaknesses in the criminal case?
2/ Now look at same wording in Trump's brief to court (same as wording in lawyers' certification).
And bad for Trump: This statement ties Trump's actions directly to the "diligent" (but now we know, highly limited) search and other (false) representations in the certification.👇
3/ DOJ previously called out Trump for saying diligent search was carried out in Florida, and not other states.👇
It's even legally worse for Trump and these lawyers if the "diligent" search was only of boxes and only in the storage room.
2. “Bobb also spoke to investigators about Trump legal adviser Boris Epshteyn, who she said did not help draft the statement but was minimally involved in discussions about the records.”
— reporting by @MarcACaputo with at least three sources