buh buh biden
2021-05-18 08:59:16 UTC
Rudy Giulianis lawyers asked a federal judge on Monday to unseal the
affidavits supporting the search warrant on his electronic devices and
demanded an explanation for prosecutions claim that the former mayor and
counsel for Donald Trump may have destroyed evidence if he knew the
government was on his trail.
In addition, in the original warrant for the iCloud account, there is a
non-disclosure order based upon an allegation made to the issuing Court,
that if Giuliani were informed of the existence of the warrant, he might
destroy evidence or intimidate witnesses, Giulianis lawyer Robert
Costello wrote in a 17-page letter to the judge unsealed on Monday. Such
an allegation, on its face, strains credulity. It is not only false, but
extremely damaging to Giulianis reputation. It is not supported by any
credible facts and is contradicted by Giulianis efforts to provide
information to the Government. We should be allowed to question the
Government as to what basis it had, if any, to make that assertion.
Giulianis lawyers claim that the prosecutors method of gleaning the
evidence prejudiced both the former mayor and Trump.
Unfortunately for Giuliani, and even more unfortunately for the attorney-
client privilege and executive deliberation privilege, and the publics
perception that those privileges are real, the SDNY simply chose to treat
a distinguished lawyer as if he was the head of a drug cartel or a
terrorist, in order to create maximum prejudicial coverage of both
Giuliani, and his most well-known client the former President of the
United States, the letter continues.
Roughly a week after the raid on Giulianis home and office, federal
prosecutors set the stage for the sort of attorney-client privilege fight
that unfolded in the Southern District of New York some three years ago in
the case of Trumps ex-fixer Michael Cohen. The government asked the judge
to appoint a special master to assess the thorny privilege issues
involving a practicing attorney whose sometime client is a former
president of the United States.
Giulianis response to that request was due last week, but his May 12
legal brief was unsealed in redacted form on Monday. It appears to confirm
earlier reports in the Daily Beast that prosecutors tapped into Giulianis
iCloud via a covert warrant in 2019.
We initially raise our serious concern over the broad and sweeping nature
of the searches executed on an attorneys home and law office, and the
covert search and review of the same attorneys iCloud account in 2019,
and then, the failure to give notice to Giuliani and his clients, and
withholding information about that search for 18 months, the letter
states. During that period the government unilaterally reviewed all the
information, privileged and not, and made entirely uninformed decisions
about privilege (without any input from the clients or their counsel).
This was during a period when the President was under investigation by
that very office and the Justice Department of which they are an integral
part.
Giulianis team is now challenging the earlier warrant, from the time he
was representing Trump.
We request that this Court grant access to the material gathered in 2019,
which was reviewed by the governments secret Taint Team and determined
by them, without judicial supervision, to be non-privileged, responsive
and relevant, their letter states. After our review, we expect to be
able to expand our argument that this unilateral, secret review was
illegal and should be deterred in the future by suppression of any
evidence considered, and also any information obtained as fruit of this
poisoned tree.
The former mayors lawyers note their offers of cooperation were so open
and notorious that Giulianis counsel made a statement saying exactly that
on national television to CNNs Chris Cuomo on Nov. 25, 2019, embedding a
screenshot from that broadcast as an exhibit.
Giulianis lawyers appear to confirm accounts the Trumps Department of
Justice stalled the Southern District of New Yorks efforts to pursue the
investigation, denying two requests to retrieve his electronic devices.
This reportedly fell as part of a pattern of former Attorney General Bill
Barrs pattern of interfering in investigations that embarrassed Trump of
his allies.
After two failed attempts, the SDNY learned its lesson, their letter
states. Now, they waited until the Biden administration was in office and
more particularly, senior members of the Justice Department had been
removed and replaced by Biden appointees. The SDNY went back to the
Department of Justice for its third attempt to seek permission to seek
their do-over application for a search warrant and this time they were
apparently successful, for they then approached this Court seeking
warrants to search Mayor Giulianis apartment and law office.
The thorniness of the attorney-client privilege issues may be compounded
by the fact that prosecutors also want the special master to scrutinize
materials related to another covert warrant for Victoria Toensing, a
conservative attorney and TV personality whose electronic devices were
also seized.
Toensing represented indicted Ukrainian oligarch Dmytro Firtash, who along
with Giuliani was reportedly linked to the scheme to gin up political dirt
on then-candidate Joe Biden, in a scandal the led to Trumps first
impeachment. Firtash, who is indicted on unrelated bribery allegations,
denies the charges against him.
A former U.S. Attorney for the same office apparently treating him as a
target, Giuliani is also represented by Arthur Aidala, Barry Kamins, John
M. Leventhal, and Michael Jaccarino.
Listen to Law&Crimes podcast Objections: With Adam Klasfeld for more
information about the Giuliani investigation:
Read the letter below:
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/20743501/rudy-giuliani-warrant-
brief-51221.pdf
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/asking-a-judge-to-unseal-files-rudy-
giulianis-lawyers-demand-explanation-for-extremely-damaging-claim-that-he-
might-destroy-evidence/
affidavits supporting the search warrant on his electronic devices and
demanded an explanation for prosecutions claim that the former mayor and
counsel for Donald Trump may have destroyed evidence if he knew the
government was on his trail.
In addition, in the original warrant for the iCloud account, there is a
non-disclosure order based upon an allegation made to the issuing Court,
that if Giuliani were informed of the existence of the warrant, he might
destroy evidence or intimidate witnesses, Giulianis lawyer Robert
Costello wrote in a 17-page letter to the judge unsealed on Monday. Such
an allegation, on its face, strains credulity. It is not only false, but
extremely damaging to Giulianis reputation. It is not supported by any
credible facts and is contradicted by Giulianis efforts to provide
information to the Government. We should be allowed to question the
Government as to what basis it had, if any, to make that assertion.
Giulianis lawyers claim that the prosecutors method of gleaning the
evidence prejudiced both the former mayor and Trump.
Unfortunately for Giuliani, and even more unfortunately for the attorney-
client privilege and executive deliberation privilege, and the publics
perception that those privileges are real, the SDNY simply chose to treat
a distinguished lawyer as if he was the head of a drug cartel or a
terrorist, in order to create maximum prejudicial coverage of both
Giuliani, and his most well-known client the former President of the
United States, the letter continues.
Roughly a week after the raid on Giulianis home and office, federal
prosecutors set the stage for the sort of attorney-client privilege fight
that unfolded in the Southern District of New York some three years ago in
the case of Trumps ex-fixer Michael Cohen. The government asked the judge
to appoint a special master to assess the thorny privilege issues
involving a practicing attorney whose sometime client is a former
president of the United States.
Giulianis response to that request was due last week, but his May 12
legal brief was unsealed in redacted form on Monday. It appears to confirm
earlier reports in the Daily Beast that prosecutors tapped into Giulianis
iCloud via a covert warrant in 2019.
We initially raise our serious concern over the broad and sweeping nature
of the searches executed on an attorneys home and law office, and the
covert search and review of the same attorneys iCloud account in 2019,
and then, the failure to give notice to Giuliani and his clients, and
withholding information about that search for 18 months, the letter
states. During that period the government unilaterally reviewed all the
information, privileged and not, and made entirely uninformed decisions
about privilege (without any input from the clients or their counsel).
This was during a period when the President was under investigation by
that very office and the Justice Department of which they are an integral
part.
Giulianis team is now challenging the earlier warrant, from the time he
was representing Trump.
We request that this Court grant access to the material gathered in 2019,
which was reviewed by the governments secret Taint Team and determined
by them, without judicial supervision, to be non-privileged, responsive
and relevant, their letter states. After our review, we expect to be
able to expand our argument that this unilateral, secret review was
illegal and should be deterred in the future by suppression of any
evidence considered, and also any information obtained as fruit of this
poisoned tree.
The former mayors lawyers note their offers of cooperation were so open
and notorious that Giulianis counsel made a statement saying exactly that
on national television to CNNs Chris Cuomo on Nov. 25, 2019, embedding a
screenshot from that broadcast as an exhibit.
Giulianis lawyers appear to confirm accounts the Trumps Department of
Justice stalled the Southern District of New Yorks efforts to pursue the
investigation, denying two requests to retrieve his electronic devices.
This reportedly fell as part of a pattern of former Attorney General Bill
Barrs pattern of interfering in investigations that embarrassed Trump of
his allies.
After two failed attempts, the SDNY learned its lesson, their letter
states. Now, they waited until the Biden administration was in office and
more particularly, senior members of the Justice Department had been
removed and replaced by Biden appointees. The SDNY went back to the
Department of Justice for its third attempt to seek permission to seek
their do-over application for a search warrant and this time they were
apparently successful, for they then approached this Court seeking
warrants to search Mayor Giulianis apartment and law office.
The thorniness of the attorney-client privilege issues may be compounded
by the fact that prosecutors also want the special master to scrutinize
materials related to another covert warrant for Victoria Toensing, a
conservative attorney and TV personality whose electronic devices were
also seized.
Toensing represented indicted Ukrainian oligarch Dmytro Firtash, who along
with Giuliani was reportedly linked to the scheme to gin up political dirt
on then-candidate Joe Biden, in a scandal the led to Trumps first
impeachment. Firtash, who is indicted on unrelated bribery allegations,
denies the charges against him.
A former U.S. Attorney for the same office apparently treating him as a
target, Giuliani is also represented by Arthur Aidala, Barry Kamins, John
M. Leventhal, and Michael Jaccarino.
Listen to Law&Crimes podcast Objections: With Adam Klasfeld for more
information about the Giuliani investigation:
Read the letter below:
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/20743501/rudy-giuliani-warrant-
brief-51221.pdf
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/asking-a-judge-to-unseal-files-rudy-
giulianis-lawyers-demand-explanation-for-extremely-damaging-claim-that-he-
might-destroy-evidence/