We learned yesterday that Allen Weisselberg's severance agreement will ultimately pay him $2 million by 12/31/24 if he fully complies. What I didn't appreciate is what he promised in return: 1/
To some extent, it's not atypical to require an employee to promise not to assist with others' claims. The problem here is context--and timing. 2/
Let's start with the fact that while Weisselberg left the company at the end of 2022 and the agreement contemplated his completing his work in good faith before that date, it wasn't executed by him until the literal eve of his Jan. 10, 2023 sentencing. 3/
And it wasn't signed by Alan Garten, the Trump organization's chief legal officer, until Jan. 12, two days after Weisselberg entered Rikers. 4/
What's more, according to the payment schedule appended to the agreement, the Trump Org. did not start paying him until Mar. 31, 2023, well into his prison sentence and certainly *after* reports that the Manhattan DA was still investigating Weisselberg for insurance fraud. 5/
Now let's go back to *his* severance obligations. They include cooperating in an investigation or litigation against the company or Trumps by meeting with them in connection with "discovery or pretrial issues" and providing "truthful testimony on behalf of Releasees." 6/
That means he was likely obligated to meet with them before his trial testimony. 7/
The severance agreement also entitles Weisselberg to be indemnified for any reasonable attorney's fees in any legal matter against him or the company--but there's some big catches. 8/
He can't hire a lawyer without the company's prior approval, and "to the extent there is no direct conflict of interest and at the election of the Company, [Weisselberg] shall be jointly represented by counsel for the Company." 9/
Put another way, if he wants his own fees paid, they get to decide who represents him and even force their own lawyers on him. 10/
But, of course, all of this pales in comparison to Weisselberg's commitment that except where forced by subpoena or other court-ordered process, he won't give information to anyone else with claims against the company and/or anyone he individually released (e.g., Trump)...11/
or "take any action to induce, encourage, instigate, aid, abet or otherwise cause" any person or entity "to bring or file a complaint, charge, lawsuit or other proceeding of any kind against the Company or any person or entity released by this Agreement." 12/
Read broadly, the agreement precludes Weisselberg from voluntarily cooperating with any law enforcement or prosecutorial agency in exchange for lenience as to other crimes for which he could be under investigation and/or ultimately charged. 13/
And yes, that might be the definition of unenforceable as a matter of public policy. But if you're Weisselberg, what incentive do you have to test that proposition when you have $2 million in severance, payable even if you die, riding on it? None. FIN.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
NEW: While the Department of Justice issued a statement last night about the criminal charges against Rep. McIver, a spokesperson for her legal team confirms that it did not receive the charging document for until this morning, 12-plus hours later. 1/
DOJ policy, as embodied in the Justice Manual, is clear: "DOJ personnel shall not respond to questions about the existence of an ongoing investigation or comment on its nature or progress before charges are publicly filed." 2/
There are exceptions, including "[w]hen the community needs to be reassured that the appropriate law enforcement agency is investigating a matter, or where release of information is necessary to protect the public safety," but neither is relevant here. 3/
Harvard researcher Kseniia Petrova has been charged criminally with smuggling goods -- e.g., frog embryos and samples thereof -- into the United States on the same day the judge overseeing her habeas case questioned the government's authority to revoke her visa. 1/
The administration told that judge, Christina Reiss, they intend to send Petrova back to Russia, despite her fear of arrest due to her support for Ukraine. Reiss scheduled a bail hearing on May 28, "potentially setting the stage for Ms. Petrova’s release." 2/ ...nytimes.com/2025/05/14/h
At some point today, the administration moved to unseal its criminal complaint against Petrova in a Massachusetts federal court and represented she has been arrested. 3/
There's been significant focus today on what the opinion dismissing the criminal case against Eric Adams says about Trump's DOJ. But what it says about the career prosecutors involved is as, if not more, significant. 1/
The Adams debacle resulted in the resignation of two prosecutors, then-acting U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon and AUSA Hagan Scotten, both former SCOTUS clerks and all-around superstars. And DOJ placed three other members of the core case team on administrative leave. 2/
In a now-public memo, DOJ told Sassoon they would be investigated by DOJ's Office of Professional Responsibility and pursuant to Trump's executive order directing the A.G. to investigate "weaponization of justice" and to issue a report. 3/
I want to live in a world where we do not talk about judges as if they owe their allegiance, or their very existence, to a particular president. Based on my experience as both a litigator and a journalist, that describes the vast majority of the federal judiciary. 1/
And yet, Judge Aileen Cannon, for all of her credentials and pre-judicial experience, has consistently staged the hearing of motions in a way that favors Trump and his co-defendants, handpicked a theory of dismissal at the invitation-by-concurrence of Justice Thomas, and even exercised jurisdiction she did not have. 2/
Her actions concerning the Special Counsel’s report, for example, were premised on authority she had stripped herself of by dismissing the case and an eventuality she refused to acknowledge: that the indictment against the two people who would supposedly be prejudiced by the report’s release not only had been dismissed but that DOJ’s pending appeal of her ruling will soon disappear too.
NEW: Per @adamreisstv, Rudy Giuliani is now almost 90 minutes late for a one-day trial on whether his Palm Beach, FL condo can be taken to satisfy his $146 million debt to former GA election workers Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss. 1/
Rudy owes the women that money because his failure to participate in their defamation lawsuit was so complete that they won a default judgment on liability. And when they tried the issue of damages to a jury last December, that $146 million was the jury’s award. 2/
Since then, he has been playing games with several courts in an attempt to conceal or even exclude his assets from being seized to pay them. He first filed for bankruptcy, only to have his case kicked out of court for his obfuscation and withholding of information. 3/
🧵: In October 2024, @SenWhitehouse released a report about the FBI's supplemental investigation of Brett Kavanaugh after allegations that he sexually assaulted Christine Blasey Ford surfaced. 1/
And that report caused Whitehouse to find that the FBI's supplemental investigation was deeply flawed and manipulated by the Trump White House despite public attestations that the FBI had carte blanche to pursue all investigative leads. 2/
In his conclusion, Whitehouse noted, "Reliable background investigations of judicial nominees are crucial to the Senate’s constitutional duty to provide advice and consent," a statement with which I imagine most senators would concur, at least in a general sense. 3/