Trump Attorney Blasts Mueller Over Manafort Raid

582px-US-FBI-ShadedSeal.svgWhite_House_North_Side_Comparison2After just recently sending the President’s “appreciation and greetings” and triggering new allegations of criminal acts, one of President Donald Trump’s lawyers, John Dowd, is now denouncing Mueller for the pre-dawn raid on the Alexandria home of former campaign manager Paul Manafort.  I have commented that the raid seemed intentionally heavy handed and meant to convey a message to Manafort. However, I fail to see why the President’s counsel (rather than Manafort’s counsel) should be making such objections. It, once again, removes any perceived separation between President Trump and obvious targets like Manafort.

In an email sent to the Wall Street Journal, Doud questioned the validity of the search warrant itself, calling it an “extraordinary invasion of privacy.” Dowd noted that the Special Counsel never demanded the materials before the raid and that Manafort was cooperating with congressional investigators.  Dowd objected that “These failures by Special Counsel to exhaust less intrusive methods is a fatal flaw in the warrant process and would call for a Motion to Suppress the fruits of the search.” The concern about exhausting less intrusive means is a valid one but that does not make Dowd the appropriate vehicle for such objections.  While this may have been sent at the encouragement of the President (who continues to resist advice about separating himself from this investigation), it only undermines the President’s position in the investigation.

Both the President and his counsel need to consider the perils in removing the crush space between him and his former aides as this case moves into the grand jury stage. These cathartic statements may be satisfying in the short term but they could pose serious long-term political and even legal problems. I do not believe that this evidence would be quashed on these facts and the suggestion of an suppression effort at this stage could not be more damaging to the public position of the President.

 

82 thoughts on “Trump Attorney Blasts Mueller Over Manafort Raid”

  1. When you break down someone’s door and come in to search in the morning hours before dawn then you commit a civil rights violation. I don’t care if there is some judge authorizing this with a so called warrant. The judge needs to have his home raided by the Klan.

    1. I get the distinct impression Autumn that the entire American political class is nothing more than one MASSIVE criminal cartel with factions warring over control. DWS, while a notable insider in the regime was protected, she has damaged one faction and perhaps exposed the entire cartel from which they will take years to recover. If she doesn’t wake up with a horse’s head in her bed (other than the one on her shoulders), and if she does not face serious charges, then she must have some damaging evidence that will only come to light if she meets a different fate.

  2. The ruling class, shadow government, “deep state,” has had its plane pulled over by Bill Clinton on the tarmac of the American airport and been presented with an “offer it can’t refuse.”

    If it is not Bill at the head of the shadow government, then who?

    Rosenstein, the “tip of the spear,” turned the liberal’s impeccable “golden boy,” little Bobby Mueller, loose to round up a posse consisting of Queen Hillary Clinton staffers, donors, sycophants and apologists, as a continuance of the 2016 election and weaponizing the American legal system.

    This purely political sham “investigation” has no crime and no probable cause. Theoretical “Russian collusion” would not be a criminal matter but an intelligence and counter-intelligence operation.

    Rosenstein, Mueller et al. must be removed, their fraudulent and treasonous investigation shut down, and prosecuted for abuse of the power of government against the People, conspiracy to subvert the duly elected government and conducting a coup d’etat in America.

    Meanwhile and allegedly, Steve Wasserman is the US Attorney investigating the murder of Seth Rich who was an employee of Debbie Wasserman Schultz at the DNC.

    This manipulation of the American legal system and corruption of justice is more egregious than nonexistent, theoretical “Russian collusion” and this coup d’etat in America must be defeated.

    1. Loosen the chinstrap on that tinfoil chapeau.

      This is to “got inside scoop” George

  3. It might be worth revisiting some other early morning raids:

    “Diane Roark served as a top staff member on the House Intelligence Committee from 1985 to 2002. She fought to end the NSA’s post-9/11 warrantless wiretapping initiative, telling FRONTLINE she considered the program “unethical, immoral, politically stupid, illegal and unconstitutional.” Roark spoke to FRONTLINE’s Jim Gilmore on Dec. 11, 2013.”

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/government-elections-politics/united-states-of-secrets/the-frontline-interview-diane-roark/

    July 26, 2007, the feds raid your home. Take us to that morning. Tell us the story of what happened.

    My interview with the FBI and the U.S. attorney lasted for three hours, and by the end, it was much more friendly than it had been at the beginning. So I assumed that they were satisfied. We never heard anything after that. My attorney in fact put the case in a dead file.

    And then, at 6:00 a.m. on July 26, 2007, five months later, six months later almost, they raided my house and spent five hours there going through everything, and took a whole lot of papers, Rolodex, electronics, only a few of which I have gotten back.

  4. Sorry, Issac, idiots don’t become multi-billionaires. And JT, how can you possibly imply that Trump and his people should not comment on the Man\nafort investigation because it has nothing to do with Trump. Seriously????

            1. @ frankly about “He doesn’t have any of those “old feminists” to pick on .lol”

              Yes. It must be hard for him. : )

  5. At this point, I think the real damage is to the reputation of the FBI. Heavyhanded techniques like home raids, especially where there is a political conflict narrative, are very troubling. You would think that the FBI would like to remain neutral in political infighting, and not be dragged into post-campaign investigations.

    You know we still have to have an election process that good people will be willing to step forward to participate in. If gaming the opposition with post-election legal witch-hunts becomes commonplace, who is going to step forward?

    1. But rational people don’t think it’s a witch hunt. That’s where you’re missing the boat. Expand your sources of information; you’re confused because Pravda Faux News won’t discuss facts.

      This it to “where’s the remote” pbinc

  6. No question Trump is behind these stupid legal moves that expose him to potential charges. The question is why does he insist on such moronic actions by those who work for him? The only answer is the most obvious and the one that is most horrifying: he is mentally unstable. Because he is mentally unfit he should not be President but since the Republicans are so corrupt and craven and will never remove him from power the fruits of his mental instability and derangement are manifest in his self evident lack of any impulse control, his outright recklessness, his juvenile verbal assaults on anyone who might do something he doesn’t like including the congressional leaders upon whose cooperation he must depend and his dangerously irresponsible inability to stop tweeting on matters of grave importance to our nation and the world. His cartoonish blustering and threats against N. Korea are disgraceful, dangerous and lowers our great nation to the level of a crackpot dictator. He is clearly unfit for the office and should be removed asap.

    1. Horuss, You are not very bright. Republican establishment would LOVE to get rid of Trump.

        1. If establishment did not support t rump they would impeach him.

          Well that’s one inch-deep thought to consider. They might instead try to undermine his legitimacy and oppose his agenda. That didn’t work out so well with the last President when half of Congress dropped their pants to his every move.

      1. The following can all be true: 1) Trump is unfit to hold the office, 2) the Republican establishment would love to get rid of Trump if they could do so without causing collateral damage to Republicans, and 3) The Republican Establishment won’t act on their desire to get rid of Trump, some because they are afraid of creating a huge split in the Republican Party and some because they want to leverage Trump’s presence for their own benefit for as long as possible.

    2. I find that those who claim the President is mentally unstable are usually mentally unstable themselves.

      1. Sometimes it takes one to know one. I guess that makes us both mentally unstable, eh?

    1. “Trump’s legal team is no match for Mueller’s.”
      _________________________________

      A legal “competition” for the “truth.”

      The law cannot possibly be that complicated.

      The corruption can.

      Mueller will never find what 20 opposition candidates couldn’t find during an American Presidential election.

      If Trump committed a crime, he won’t be able to hide it.

      If Trump didn’t commit a crime, Mueller won’t be able to find it.

      What’s happening here, however, has nothing to do with crime.

      With the possible exception of unrelated international intelligence and counter intelligence operations, it has only to do with politics.

      The People are intended to win in American politics, and they voted in November.

      What’s happening here is the nullification of the vote of the People and the overthrow of a duly elected

      government.

      The question is: Will the People allow treason and a coup d’etat in America?

  7. If Manafort engaged in criminal activity that doesn’t implicate the orange buffoon, then why should his lawyer say anything? Perhaps Tangerine Man is worried that Manafort will flip on him in exchange for immunity. Again, if Chump’s skirts were clean, he’d have nothing to worry about. He has been setting the stage all along for his defense: calling “the Russia story” a “hoax”. I don’t even know what the facts are of “the Russia story”, because facts are still being developed. All I know is that there are investigations being conducted by several entities, and that is not a hoax at all. As to Alfred’s comment that Chump “…has no way to defend himself against any accusations”, who’s made any accusations at this point? There was enough evidence to generate investigations. There was enough evidence that a Judge found probable cause to issue search warrants, and given that this is a high-profile matter, I’m certain that the Judge carefully scrutinized the allegations in the probable cause affidavit and the scope of the search before issuing the warrant. If Chump tries to interfere with any of the investigations, he’s looking at obstruction of justice charges, and as we know from Nixon, that’s enough for impeachment. If and when charges are brought, Chump can defend himself, but attempting a preemptive strike at this stage makes him look very, very guilty.

  8. The concern about exhausting less intrusive means is a valid one but that does not make Dowd the appropriate vehicle for such objections.

    So while every legal expert under the sun can openly argue the merits of the raid, an attorney for President Trump, who should rightly be concerned his client would in any way be ensnared in the Manafort investigation, has no reasonable grounds to question the rationale behind the raid. It’s as though you believe President Trump should stand idle at the edge of a cliff and wait for the herd that Mueller and Company are driving toward him.

    1. No, it’s as though Professor Turely is an excellent lawyer and knows what he’s talking about. Evidently you, like Trump, can’t comprehend the obvious wisdom in Turley’s opinion on this.

      1. Turley is a fantastic Professor/Constituional Lawyer, but he’s a lefty by nature…lefties often go weak kneed when it comes to fighting. Turley would have Trump curl into a fetal position while Mueller hunts down his close associates and family members. That’s not Trump’s nature and that why his base loves him. A man who does not defend himself and those around him is not a man.

        1. Ivan: defend himself against what, exactly? Are you saying that he has the right to attempt to interfere with an investigation conducted by Congressional committees or a Special Prosecutor because they might find out that he and/or family members have committed crimes? Does he have some sort of right to commit crimes? What causes you to think that Mueller is “hunting down …close associates and family members”? If they’ve done nothing wrong, they have nothing to fear. Probable cause for some kind of crime was found by the federal judge who issued the search warrant. You already are skeptical of the motives of these investigators before they’ve even completed their investigation because you buy everything Tangerine Man says. The results of the investigation will be disclosed at some future time, but you are already willing to believe that there is no merit in the investigation without even hearing any facts because Tangerine Man says it’s a witch hunt. You count yourself as among his “base [who] love him”. It scares the hell out of me that I live in a country where people are so blind and easily misled by a bloated showman who is doing an historically poor job and who might just get lots of people killed because he wants to show off what a big shot he thinks he is.

          1. It scares the hell out of me that I live in a country where people are so blind and easily misled by…

            Natacha,
            I asked you yesterday what type of actions would you expect to see if someone in the government class was putting our national security at risk. If your eyes are so wide open and you are not easily mislead, then would this following list be of no concern to you, or would any of them be worthy of an investigation by a special prosecutor?

            Here are some examples of actions that might need to be questioned:

            Would the sharing of classified information purposely over non-secure servers be such a risk?

            Would selling control of 20% of our own uranium deposits to a foreign government or company be such a risk?

            Would trading an American deserter for 5 radical Islamic militants be such a risk?

            Would enabling a major foreign bank to launder money within the US banking system for terrorist organizations and drug cartels be such a risk?

            Would running guns from American companies to drug cartels be such a risk?

            Would supporting a hostile foreign government’s pursuit of nuclear power by removing sanctions and providing $100 billion in cash be such a risk?

            Would receiving donations from foreign governments and NGO’s into one’s foundation while holding a cabinet level position be such a risk?

            I’m all for having oversight of our government class, and citizens for that matter, where we prevent actions that would potentially threaten our nation security. I ask these questions because while the ongoing investigations are in search of connections with foreign governments and NGO’s; I see no evidence of actual actions by Trump or his administration that warrant this investigation IF those actions mentioned above do not rise to the level or national security risk deserving of the same attention.

            1. Olly, once again, you’re asking Natacha for classified information. It’s doubtful that Natacha has top-secret security clearance. If I’m wrong about that, then you’re asking Natacha to commit a crime by leaking classified information to you and the rest of us. Your request from Natacha is at least roughly analogous to Trump’s request from The Russian Federation for Hilary Clinton’s missing, deleted e-mails. When did it become necessary to prove an actual criminal offense in order to investigate an alleged crime?

            2. Pravda Faux News must still be running Hillary jibber jabber to keep you people so distracted. Once again, News Flash: Hillary is not the President.

              This is to “oh, I forgot” olly

        2. Having observed Turley for some time, I find odd the comment “he’s a lefty by nature.” My observation is that he often comes down on both sides of an issue and almost always side’s with Trump as having the right to do a thing although he would have made a different choice.

        3. Ya, this is just like elementary school recess. You tell em spanky.

          This is to “what world do you live in” ivan

    2. Turley is a licensed attorney and a law professor. Unlike Glenn Reynolds or Ann Althouse, he’s not indifferent to being considered outre in the faculty rathskellar. Ergo, he offers frequent displays of

      1. Civility bull**** and..

      2. Counfounding ‘professional ethics’ with the real kind.

  9. Why it wasn’t Manafort’s lawyer making the case for his client is curious. But Manafort has been under investigation for months so he’s not going to leave documents or computers around his house waiting to be ‘found’ by investigators. He was cooperating. He has good lawyers. He had just testified the day before. Sounds like investigators did not ask Manafort for additional materials, but instead busted his door down at dawn in a raid. What for??

    If this is about foreign money and FARA violations, then all I can say is John Podesta better be next.

    1. We don’t know whether Manafort was cooperating fully. Also, people who aren’t computer experts think they can delete things from their computers, only to find out that documents are still there and can be retrieved by a computer forensics expert. In my local community, the VA Hospital got rid of multiple laptops because they purchased new ones with bigger memories, and they believed they wiped them clean of any patient information. A local news station had a computer forensics expert pull up patient records. it wasn’t even hard to do if you know what you’re doing.

      1. BleachBit. He got a stash from Hillary. They run in the same circles, you know. Ukraine? 😉

    2. Your question of “What for” is a good question, and the answer (at least part of the answer) is in a sealed affidavit filed with the Court. Everyone wants to know the answer.

      But your assumption that Manafort is not going to leave documents or computers in locations where they can be “found” by investigators is presumptuous, as is your assumption that he really was “cooperating.” Targets or subjects of an investigation, even when they have good attorneys, can and do act irrationally. They get emotional about being the target/subject of an investigation. They don’t always tell their attorneys everything. They “hide” things in places where they think no one will find them.

      Statements that someone is “cooperating” don’t mean anything by themselves. Not to mention that prosecutors and defense attorneys generally have different understandings what it means to “cooperate.”

      Beware of the Church of Presumptuous Assumptions.

      1. Oliver

        Are you referring to the Church of Presumptuous Assumption of The Blinding Light w/Pastor Flash, the 50 Voice St.Louis Aquarium Choir, and Organist Leroy …at his organ, again. That one?

        1. Yes indeed! Pastor Rod Flash. Oh, Blinding LIght, Oh Blinding Light, I cannot see, look out for me!

    3. TBob, Manafort still has to earn a living to pay for four houses as well as legal representation. It is at least conceivable that Manafort would keep business records necessary to earn future income from his business dealings with all sorts of different people. Surely one can stretch one’s imagination at least that far.

    1. Tough and decisive action will be taken, he said. And a promise of extensive use of new technology. Goodnight and good luck Kim Jong un.

      1. Please expound on this “decisive action.” how many people would die? What are the acceptable civilian casualties? What would it mean to Sout Korea, Japan or Guam?

        1. enigma – think back to WWII and the firebombing of Germany and Japan. What were the acceptable civilian causalities? Civilians are always at the mercy of war. The key to any battle is: What are the acceptable number of losses on your side?

          1. Given the nature of the kind of attack Trump described, “the likes of which the world has never seen.” Will acceptable losses be half the population of South Korea our ally? That could be from nuclear fallout or conventional weapons already aimed at them. Then there are the approximately 23,500 troops stationed in South Korea. Our troops (and civilians) are possibly at risk in Guam and Japan as well. Of course, this assumes we go ahead and wipe out North Korea and we only suffer a single retaliatory strike. Are we risking enough yet to very possibly distract from Trump’s other woes?

            1. enigma – with every new President, the North Koreans rattle their sabres to see how they will be paid off to stop rattling them. This time, Kim is insane. It is difficult to deal with insane leader with nukes. I was in Omaha (home of the B-52) during the Cuban Missile Crisis. I kissed my a$$ goodbye a long time ago.

          2. The keys to military strategy are to figure out what one’s own goal is or might be and what one’s enemy’s goal is or might be. Even at this latest stage the most likely goals for North Korea remain simply getting our attention and making trouble for us and our allies. As for our goals, go ask Trump if he can articulate any.

              1. Paul, no. But the statement I made about goals is a decent paraphrase of testimony given to Congress by General David Petraeus.

                BTW, the quagmire of The Vietnam War stemmed from the unwillingness of U. S. military planners to estimate the losses North Vietnam and The Viet Cong were willing to accept–namely, all of their people.

                The North Koreans are not different on that count. There is no number of losses at which North Korea will surrender. You can’t beat an opponent with that mindset, no matter how many college courses on military strategy you’ve taken, Paul.

                1. Diane – you know nothing of the Vietnam War and even less about NK. All rulers want to survive. So, the solution is you convince Kim he is not going to survive. We probably have several nuclear subs sitting off North Korea right now with nuke tipped missiles ready to go. If I were Kim, I would be getting out my best brown pants.

        2. Weird. I’ve written about five replies here to your post and each time nothing happens. Nothing posts, no error message. Just nothing. Poof. My replies disappear. I’m only writing a few sentences, no links included or anything. Now I’m testing to see if this one goes through and posts.

          1. Okay, I tried it again replying to this one and it went poof and disappeared again. I give up.

            1. I see that. But each time I hit ‘Post Comment’ with the response to your Q, my post never posts. It just doesn’t post. I can’t see any problem with the words I’m using, so it’s a mystery. If ‘this’ shows up, then I am truly baffled.

              1. Happened again. My actual words responding to your Q are going into the black hole. Odd. Anyway, I was just repeating what Trump said. No one knows what ‘crazy’ Trump will do, but they do know that he WILL act. And whatever action we take will be as swift and humane and humanly possible. Best case scenario is obviously that diplomacy wins.

  10. “that does not make Dowd the appropriate vehicle for such objections.”

    any, and every, American is “the appropriate vehicle for such objections”.

    Stop the childish, elitist, and swampy judgment of “this is not how things are done here” assessments.

    Americans are sick of your tried and failed “proper rules of engagement.”

  11. Reports are they took the briefs for his appearence before Congress. That is just chickens**t.

  12. I agree with you totally but Mueller is going off the rails! Someone needs to stop them but can’t? The problem with the investigations is Donald Trump has no way to defend himself against any accusations?👎😀🦊🇺🇸

    1. The problem is Trump can’t defend himself against being an idiot. Let’s call a spade a spade, or a buffoon a buffoon.

Comments are closed.