Expected in Manhattan Federal Court today:
* @MichaelCohen212
* @StormyDaniels, with her attorney @MichaelAvenatti
* @realDonaldTrump’s legal team
* @SDNYNews prosecutors
Preview + live-tweet to come. What happened Friday: courthousenews.com/trumps-attorne…
Jury selection began roughly two hours ago in the retrial of a corruption case against ex-NY Assembly leader Sheldon Silver. courthousenews.com/sheldon-silver…
1) A reporter reflecting upon his Iraq war correspondence and the 2008 financial crisis argues in the New Yorker that the Cohen investigation marks "The End Stage of the Trump Presidency"
Here's the letter: documentcloud.org/documents/4438…
Cohen argues that "the appointment of a Special Master" will shield against "toxic partisan politics of the day" and "attacks on the impartiality of the Justice Department and the USAO."
Who's been making those attacks, I wonder?
courthousenews.com/trump-team-dem…
"Special master" is a court-appointed third party -- usually an attorney -- who would be called upon here to navigate attorney-client privilege matters.
The brief: documentcloud.org/documents/4438…
Cohen's attorneys correct their original brief, which initially described their mystery client's legal matters as "responsive" the search warrant.
Their corrected brief says, "not responsive."
Nice catch by @JRiley8832.
He's in New York today, however...
Asking for dozens of photographers and reporters barricaded in press pens in front of the courtroom for a hearing that's starting in eight minutes.
Judge for yourself.
The bench remains empty, as the attorneys wait for the hearing to begin.
Judge Wood just took the stand.
The attorneys introduce themselves.
Judge: Do you know roughly the volume of privileged documents that were seized?
Cohen's attorney Todd Harrison: No, judge, we don't... We don't recognize all of the items that the government seized.
McKay: "No. In fact, because of the pendancy of this motion," it's difficult to talk to privilege team.
"The silence from the Trump Organization is telling," he adds later.
This is "far from" the Lynne Stewart case, he continues.
More on that case here. courthousenews.com/trump-team-dem…
"If he can't disclose the client name, even to the court under seal..." McKay asks how the government can contest an overbroad claim of privilege.
Cohen and Trump both made "inflammatory" attacks on that search, McKay said.
Jargon explanation: In camera = for the judge's eyes alone.
After commenting on Cohen's responsibilities, Ryan says: "I'm simply trying to protect the privacy of that individual."
An attorney for the press objects, notes that the public also has a right.
The reason this is so, Balin says, is, "So that We the People, and the press, can monitor our institutions."
Crowd-source request: Does that ring a bell to any attorneys?
As noted, Judge Wood made her ruling on disclosure, but no name yet. They're arguing about a privilege log.
Todd Harrison is up now.
"My guess is that this could be done in relatively short order," he said.
He claims it would be easier than Lynne Stewart case, which took 15 months.
Harrison doubles down on claim that there are "thousands" of privileged documents, a number that he struggled to corroborate on Friday.
Wood challenged him on it back then.
"I think that America, frankly, is looking to the court as the third co-equal branch of gov't..." to provide the appearance of fairness.
"Everyone is watching this case, that may be true," but that's why the court should follow the usual procedures, McKay says.
"The motion should be denied because the factual premise for it is faulty," he says.
Those might fall under the sweeping rubric of ones that "relate" to Trump "in any way."
"They are going to start by bidding high in the amount of privileged material," the prosecutor said.
Art of the deal?
Ryan represents Cohen in the Russia probe.
"Their privilege is no different form the President of the United States' privilege," he said.
Prosecutors expressed that fear earlier.
"That may be right, that may be wrong," she says, but adds someone who "holds these views and expresses them publicly cannot be counted upon" to vindicate attorney-client privilege.
Instead of a special master, Hendon proposes Cohen and Trump's legal teams assert privilege for review and take it to the gov't. If gov't objects, it goes to Wood.
McKay's back up now.
"Where Mr. Cohen is clearly under criminal investigation, he is going to have even more incentive" to "drag things down" with assertions of privilege.
"Defense counsel is not going to agree with privilege determinations without consulting with her client," he notes.
It's more efficient, he argues, for USAO to give him potentially privileged documents for him to review than vice versa.
Meanwhile, outside the court:
"Privileged material may not be recognized as such," she adds later.
Judge Wood calls her premise wrong, as gov't will talk w/ her.
She wants to know how to get the matter to the "next step" and "get it underway."
McKay back up to comment on that.
"Cohen is sitting at the table and is zealously asserting his client's interest."
And...
"The premise that Mr. Cohen can't successfully navigate his client's files rings hollow."
"This is a case of first impression for this court," she claims.
McKay counters that the American citizen whose stuff was taken was someone whom a magistrate judge found evidence of crimes.
"Their integrity is unimpeachable, and so I think a taint team is a viable option."
But in terms of "perception of fairness," a special master "might have a role here," if a more limited one.
"If" there is a special master, she adds.
She solicited proposals on how to move fast.
"I'm denying the motion for a TRO because it's currently moot," she said.
The gov't isn't accessing the material now anyway
Wood: Right.
Preliminary injunction has not yet been ruled on.
Details to come.
Look out for my story soon. Here's a bare-bones DEVELOPING one for now: courthousenews.com/trump-team-dem…
You can read about it. You can be told about it, but you can only hear it in court.
CNN asked the court to make audio recordings of hearings, and release them to the public.
Denied, Judge Wood ruled today, citing a longstanding order.