Trump transition lawyer: Mueller improperly obtained documents in Russia probe

[digsbe]

Exclusive — A lawyer for the Trump presidential transition team is accusing Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s office of inappropriately obtaining transition documents as part of its Russia probe, including confidential attorney-client communications, privileged communications and thousands of emails without their knowledge.

In a letter obtained by Fox News and sent to House and Senate committees on Saturday, the transition team’s attorney alleges “unlawful conduct” by the career staff at the General Services Administration in handing over transition documents to the special counsel’s office.


The transition legal team argues the GSA “did not own or control the records in question” and the release of documents could be a violation of the 4th Amendment – which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.


Kory Langhofer, the counsel to Trump for America, wrote in Saturday's letter that the GSA handed over “tens of thousands of emails” to Mueller's probe without "any notice" to the transition.


The attorney said they discovered the “unauthorized disclosures” by the GSA on December 12th and 13th and raised concerns with the special counsel’s office.


“We understand that the special counsel’s office has subsequently made extensive use of the materials it obtained from the GSA, including materials that are susceptible to privilege claims,” Langhofer writes.


The transition attorney said the special counsel's office also received laptops, cell phones and at least one iPad from the GSA.

Trump transition lawyer: Mueller improperly obtained documents in Russia probe | Fox News

More trouble for the witch hunt. With each day it appears there are more problems and more examples of bias/collusion by the special counsel against President Trump. They may have obtained "evidence" illegally in an overreach of authority.

 

[NeverTrump]

Trump transition lawyer: Mueller improperly obtained documents in Russia probe | Fox News

More trouble for the witch hunt. With each day it appears there are more problems and more examples of bias/collusion by the special counsel against President Trump. They may have obtained "evidence" illegally in an overreach of authority.

Ever think Trump's lawyers are lying?

 

[Rogue Valley]

The server owner - General Services Administration - turned the emails over to Mueller investigators. Prosecutors investigating white collar crime do this all the time. The records can easily be obtained by subpoena, court order, or sometimes by administrative request ... a legally authorized and judicially enforceable demand for records issued by a government authority. The transition team docs/emails probably contain a treasure trove of information.

 

[Angelus]

Ever think Trump's lawyers are lying?

Surely you jest - people connected to Trump lying?!
Shocked I say - shocked!

:wow:opcorn2:

 

[digsbe]

Ever think Trump's lawyers are lying?

Of course, but I also think the "special counsel" is likely a Democrat inspired corrupt witch hunt. With each day more evidence points to that.

 

[The Mark]

Trump transition lawyer: Mueller improperly obtained documents in Russia probe | Fox News

More trouble for the witch hunt. With each day it appears there are more problems and more examples of bias/collusion by the special counsel against President Trump. They may have obtained "evidence" illegally in an overreach of authority.

Interesting.

I'm wondering if that lawyer is correct.

Some would depend on the contract Trump/his transition team had with this service provider.
But if the service provider willingly gave the information to the investigation, would the investigation be at fault in any way for accepting it?

Not sure how the nuance and details around that kind of thing work.

 

[Jetboogieman]

Digsbe, I'd bookmark this thread.

Go back and read it in 6 months and try, try to see where you went wrong.

 

[vesper]

Trump transition lawyer: Mueller improperly obtained documents in Russia probe | Fox News

More trouble for the witch hunt. With each day it appears there are more problems and more examples of bias/collusion by the special counsel against President Trump. They may have obtained "evidence" illegally in an overreach of authority.

If this report is true, it will only add to the calls for Sessions/Rosenstein to act . Mueller has no business with documents pertaining to lawyer/client conversations. That is definitely over the line.

 

[Cardinal]

Trump transition lawyer: Mueller improperly obtained documents in Russia probe | Fox News

More trouble for the witch hunt. With each day it appears there are more problems and more examples of bias/collusion by the special counsel against President Trump. They may have obtained "evidence" illegally in an overreach of authority.

1. There was nothing improper or unlawful about Mueller's acquisition of the emails.
2. Mueller isn't a Democrat.
3. And even if he was (and he's not), that would be okay because everybody is allowed to hold political positions.

 

[The Mark]

I tend to question the motivation behind accusations of misconduct on the part of Mueller and the investigation he leads.
It seems almost surely political, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's wrong.

 

[NeverTrump]

Of course, but I also think the "special counsel" is likely a Democrat inspired corrupt witch hunt.

No it's not. :roll:

 

[digsbe]

Digsbe, I'd bookmark this thread.

Go back and read it in 6 months and try, try to see where you went wrong.

Personally, in 6 months I'd love to have seen Trump resign and replaced by Pence. However, when looking at things in the full spectrum of the political world The Mueller stuff is just Democrat fodder. I mean, how many threads here get created regarding "Russian Collusion" and how Trump's going to have it handed to him... for the past year? If people really cared about foreign interests or collusion they'd demand faster and more public action/outcry against the Clintons and their ties to pay to play foreign policy and foreign money in the Clinton Foundation/liberal super PACs.

1. There was nothing improper or unlawful about Mueller's acquisition of the emails.
2. Mueller isn't a Democrat.
3. And even if he was (and he's not), that would be okay because everybody is allowed to hold political positions.

There may be improper or unlawful actions under 4th Amendment protections, as alleged. We would have to see.

Even if Mueller is a "Republican" there are many in the party that want Trump gone. I certainly didn't vote for him in the primaries and even today want to see him replaced with Pence (my top pic was Rubio). However, I do not like the witch hunt and unprecedented DNC plots to block/remove him from office.

This is more of an opinion piece so I'd take it with a grain of salt, but it was a good read and may explain some things Gregg Jarrett: Did the FBI and the Justice Department, plot to clear Hillary Clinton, bring down Trump? | Fox News

 

[exoplanet]

But if the service provider willingly gave the information to the investigation, would the investigation be at fault in any way for accepting it?

Not sure how the nuance and details around that kind of thing work.

Judging by the article, it appears that the headline is just conservative clickbait:
"transition team’s attorney alleges “unlawful conduct” by the career staff at the General Services Administration"

Apparently, even Trump's attorneys aren't alleging that Mueller did anything unlawful. It was the GSA. But if you can twist the headline to make it look like Mueller did something bad...

 

[Paperview]

The server owner - General Services Administration - turned the emails over to Mueller investigators. Prosecutors investigating white collar crime do this all the time. The records can easily be obtained by subpoena, court order, or sometimes by administrative request ... a legally authorized and judicially enforceable demand for records issued by a government authority. The transition team docs/emails probably contain a treasure trove of information.

"It's totally unfair that you're using your subpoena power to collect evidence," screamed the Trump desperate defense attorney.

 

[The Mark]

Judging by the article, it appears that the headline is just conservative clickbait:
"transition team’s attorney alleges “unlawful conduct” by the career staff at the General Services Administration"

Apparently, even Trump's attorneys aren't alleging that Mueller did anything unlawful. It was the GSA. But if you can twist the headline to make it look like Mueller did something bad...

That's what it looks like to me.

Democrats and many of the major news organizations love to seize on any tidbit of info or thing the Mueller team does and analyze the hell out of it, for partisan purposes.

Whereas republicans, or at least the Trump team, appear to want to cast doubt on the validity of that investigation, which I assume is either intended to allow them to ignore it's conclusions (whenever it actually has any), or at least get a bunch of supporters to ignore/dismiss them.

 

[Jetboogieman]

Personally, in 6 months I'd love to have seen Trump resign and replaced by Pence. However, when looking at things in the full spectrum of the political world The Mueller stuff is just Democrat fodder. I mean, how many threads here get created regarding "Russian Collusion" and how Trump's going to have it handed to him... for the past year? If people really cared about foreign interests or collusion they'd demand faster and more public action/outcry against the Clintons and their ties to pay to play foreign policy and foreign money in the Clinton Foundation/liberal super PACs.

There may be improper or unlawful actions under 4th Amendment protections, as alleged. We would have to see.

Even if Mueller is a "Republican" there are many in the party that want Trump gone. I certainly didn't vote for him in the primaries and even today want to see him replaced with Pence (my top pic was Rubio). However, I do not like the witch hunt and unprecedented DNC plots to block/remove him from office.

This is more of an opinion piece so I'd take it with a grain of salt, but it was a good read and may explain some things Gregg Jarrett: Did the FBI and the Justice Department, plot to clear Hillary Clinton, bring down Trump? | Fox News

Do I win something because I'm the millionth person to read about Clintons in a thread about Trump or an associate making unfounded allegations.

Hey Digsbe, remember when just a few days ago you stated that Alabama should vote for an alleged chaser of 14 year old girls because they were just alleged and you called it "disgusting" when they didn't.

Perhaps you should go back and read your OP very carefully and see what key words stand out to you.

 

[RAMOSS]

That's what it looks like to me.

Democrats and many of the major news organizations love to seize on any tidbit of info or thing the Mueller team does and analyze the hell out of it, for partisan purposes.

Whereas republicans, or at least the Trump team, appear to want to cast doubt on the validity of that investigation, which I assume is either intended to allow them to ignore it's conclusions (whenever it actually has any), or at least get a bunch of supporters to ignore/dismiss them.

When the law is against you, and the facts are against you, then you attack the process.

 

[Paperview]

If this report is true, it will only add to the calls for Sessions/Rosenstein to act . Mueller has no business with documents pertaining to lawyer/client conversations. That is definitely over the line.

May-bee they shooda used a private email server. LOLOLOL


Ooopsie doopsie.

MAGA'ts: Ya mean government mail server messages are subject to scrutiny?? ....oh no!! whadda mean?

 

[digsbe]

Do I win something because I'm the millionth person to read about Clintons in a thread about Trump or an associate making unfounded allegations.

Hey Digsbe, remember when just a few days ago you stated that Alabama should vote for an alleged chaser of 14 year old girls because they were just alleged and you called it "disgusting" when they didn't.

Perhaps you should go back and read your OP very carefully and see what key words stand out to you.

Are you just going to dismiss any potential DNC fraud or corruption when there likely was some with the Clinton investigation because Trump?

With the Alabama election I still stand by my comments. Moore, although not the best candidate, would make a better senator than Jones. If Jones is going to be your typical identity politics pushing wingnut not representing their state well they can toss him out when his short term is over. Moore losing doesn't mean that I still don't think he'd be a better fit that Jones.

 

[prometeus]

Ever think Trump's lawyers are lying?

For Trump apologists that is impossible.

 

[vesper]

Of course, but I also think the "special counsel" is likely a Democrat inspired corrupt witch hunt. With each day more evidence points to that.

After what has unfolded the last couple of months, it really is starting to look like a cabal orchestrated with the Obama WH, FBI and DOJ. The Clinton email investigation and the Trump campaign/transition team "Collusion with Russians" narrative have melded into one because the same players were working both at the same time.

If it is found that those at the FBI dressed up that opposition research Trump Dossier as counter intelligence to obtain a FISA warrant to spy on the Trump team, the **** is going to hit the fan.

 

[Jetboogieman]

Are you just going to dismiss any potential DNC fraud or corruption when there likely was some with the Clinton investigation because Trump?

With the Alabama election I still stand by my comments. Moore, although not the best candidate, would make a better senator than Jones. If Jones is going to be your typical identity politics pushing wingnut not representing their state well they can toss him out when his short term is over. Moore losing doesn't mean that I still don't think he'd be a better fit that Jones.

It case you missed It Digsbe, it's "alleged" and "accused".

 

[prometeus]

Are you just going to dismiss any potential DNC fraud or corruption when there likely was some with the Clinton investigation because Trump?

Are you sure you are in t the right thread?

With the Alabama election I still stand by my comments. Moore, although not the best candidate, would make a better senator than Jones.

Naturally, in your world a child molester is better than a decent man. It is a ****ed up world you live in.

 

[Objective Voice]

From the OP:

The transition legal team argues the GSA “did not own or control the records in question” and the release of documents could be a violation of the 4th Amendment – which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.

If that's the justification Trump's lawyers intends to use, then his problem isn't with Mueller. It's with the GSA office.

Worst case scenario would be the evidence the GSA obtained and subsequently released to the Special Counsel would be inadmissible as evidence in a court of law. I suspect, however, that what Trump's lawyer is trying to do is raise doubt about the documents in question in an attempt to discredit the Special Counsel at best; at worst try to get the evidence thrown out of a legal technicality long before the case is brought before the courts let alone the House (ahead of impeachment proceedings).

If you can't stop the Russia investigation by removing the investigator(s), stop it by discrediting the evidence and the methodology under which its obtained.

Good Luck with that!

 

[Objective Voice]

If this report is true, it will only add to the calls for Sessions/Rosenstein to act . Mueller has no business with documents pertaining to lawyer/client conversations. That is definitely over the line.

Actually, except for siting Executive Privilege, few discussions by the POTUS are truly private. He's a public figure. Unless his dialog is a matter of national security, there are few reasons his conversations would be bared from the legal scope of subpoena power by Special Counsel or any citizen who submits a FOIA request. Moreover, since the information the Special Counsel requested and subsequently obtained pertained only to the transition between the out-going and in-coming Administrations, there really isn't anything to bare the GSA from turning unclassified information over to Special Counsel upon legal request.