Thread by @rparloff

Govt’s filing yesterday in USA v Trump (MAL) is devastating. It was responding to Judge Cannon’s inquiry—acting on her own—suggesting there was something abusive about govt’s continued use of DC grand jury after M-a-L indictment was handed down. ...
/1

... It all began when the govt asked for a hearing on whether atty Stanley Woodward had a conflict of interest because he (a) reps def Nauta; (b) previously rep’d Trump Employee 4 (Yuscil Taveras)—now a govt witness vs. Nauta et al—& (c) reps two other potential witnesses. ...
/2

... Govt tried to accompany that motion with a sealed filing discreetly explaining the potential conflicts, but Judge Cannon—acting on her own—instantly struck it & then demanded to know why DC grand jury was still sitting ...
/3

... On Cannon’s cue, Woodward accused the special counsel of trying to “diminish [Cannon’s] authority” by abusively using DC grand jury to gather evidence for an already indicted case. ...
/4

... Woodward also asked to strike former client Yuscil Taveras’ proposed incriminating testimony against his current client Nauta to preserve integrity of proceedings & Nauta’s right to counsel of his choice. ...
/5

... Yesterday—Cannon having giving it no choice but to outline Woodward’s potential conflicts on the record— govt provided the extraordinary & damning timeline. ...
/6
bit.ly/3P3pNHj

... In Mar 2023, govt called Taveras—then rep’d by Woodward—before DC grand jury. Beforehand, govt warned Woodward of a potential conflict, but Woodward said he knew of none. Taveras then perjured self, denying discussing destroying video surveillance footage with De Oliveira.
/7

... Govt notes in passing that Taveras had been referred to Woodward by a Trump lawyer and his fees were then being paid by Trump’s Save America PAC. ...
/8

On June 8 the Florida grand jury handed first USA v Trump (MAL) indictment. It did *not* yet name De Oliveira or Taveras.
On June 20 govt advised Taveras, thru Woodward, that he was the target of perjury investigation in DC—where the perjury occurred. ...
/9

... Govt says the target letter “crystallized” Woodward’s conflict, because having Taveras correct his g.j. testimony, to avoid prosecution, would implicate Nauta, Woodward’s other client.
/10

... Woodward still declined to recognize a conflict, insisting that, per govt, Taveras could choose to tough out his indictment by going to trial and hoping for the best. He said he’d also told Taveras of his right to cooperate, too.
/10

On Jun 27 govt asked for a conflicts hearing before chief judge Boasberg in DC, who supervises the DC grand jury, where the perjury occurred. Govt advised Judge Cannon same day in sealed filings. Woodward did *not* object. ...
/11

Judge Boasberg asked an independent counsel, Shelli Peterson of DC Federal Public Defenders, to advise Taveras on potential conflicts. Taveras asked Peterson to represent him and then retracted his false testimony, implicating Nauta, De O, & Trump, per govt.
/12

Govt cites numerous binding federal appellate precedents allowing grand juries to investigate “other persons” not named in an existing indictment or to explore “additional charges” against existing defs. All seem to be apply here.
/13

... Govt notes that it could find no precedent in which a district judge struck incriminating testimony against a defendant in order to protect that def’s “right to counsel of his choice”—except one case in which the judge was overturned on appeal for having done so. ...
/14

... Pretty powerful filing, IMHO. Unnecessarily embarrassing to Woodward, Nauta, De Oliveira, Trump—and Judge Cannon. Whole filing here:
bit.ly/3P3pNHj