Andrew Weissmann

The Public Integrity Section people resigned because people are like, I didn't sign up for this. So what can the judge do? He has a narrow ability to say, I'm denying the motion. And if necessary, he could appoint somebody to go forward.

The Public Integrity Section people resigned because people are like, I didn't sign up for this. So what can the judge do? He has a narrow ability to say, I'm denying the motion. And if necessary, he could appoint somebody to go forward.

He could decide that he's going to have the case dismissed, but with prejudice, not without prejudice, so that there isn't this sort of Damocles or choke chain component to it. he could hold a factual hearing, that's what I would do, because you need to know, is there a quid pro quo and what's the nature of it? And make people have to testify under oath.

He could decide that he's going to have the case dismissed, but with prejudice, not without prejudice, so that there isn't this sort of Damocles or choke chain component to it. he could hold a factual hearing, that's what I would do, because you need to know, is there a quid pro quo and what's the nature of it? And make people have to testify under oath.

One of the little tidbits that I wanna make sure people understand is Danielle Sassoon, the Southern District acting US attorney who resigned, noted in her letter that when they had a meeting with the acting deputy attorney general, the former Trump criminal defense lawyer a New York minute ago, that he ordered her people to stop taking notes and then confiscated them. And

One of the little tidbits that I wanna make sure people understand is Danielle Sassoon, the Southern District acting US attorney who resigned, noted in her letter that when they had a meeting with the acting deputy attorney general, the former Trump criminal defense lawyer a New York minute ago, that he ordered her people to stop taking notes and then confiscated them. And

The acting deputy attorney general has not denied that. He has admitted that he did it, but he says he did it to prevent leaks. That is not facially plausible to me that that's the reason, because you know how you can't prevent leaks by taking notes. People can leak without having notes of their conversation. All it does do is eliminate the written record so that you can lie about what happened.

The acting deputy attorney general has not denied that. He has admitted that he did it, but he says he did it to prevent leaks. That is not facially plausible to me that that's the reason, because you know how you can't prevent leaks by taking notes. People can leak without having notes of their conversation. All it does do is eliminate the written record so that you can lie about what happened.

So the answer is yes, he can demand the notes. And if they have been destroyed, that is... One, it can be used by the judge as evidence that they would have been favorable to Danielle Sassoon's position that there was a quid pro quo. I mean, to me, you don't have to be a lawyer to understand that.

So the answer is yes, he can demand the notes. And if they have been destroyed, that is... One, it can be used by the judge as evidence that they would have been favorable to Danielle Sassoon's position that there was a quid pro quo. I mean, to me, you don't have to be a lawyer to understand that.

If you confiscate the notes and shred them, you're entitled to draw inferences from the fact that you did that. If they were helpful for you, you don't destroy them. Right. Right. You put them in a safe somewhere. Exactly. So the other thing he could do is something that Emmett Sullivan did in the Michael Flynn case.

If you confiscate the notes and shred them, you're entitled to draw inferences from the fact that you did that. If they were helpful for you, you don't destroy them. Right. Right. You put them in a safe somewhere. Exactly. So the other thing he could do is something that Emmett Sullivan did in the Michael Flynn case.

So that is in Trump 1.0, where remarkably, this is like the only other time I've ever heard anything like this happening. And I was a prosecutor for 21 years. The only other time I can think of a situation like this is from Trump 1.0. And there, what the judge did is he appointed somebody to represent the public interest.

So that is in Trump 1.0, where remarkably, this is like the only other time I've ever heard anything like this happening. And I was a prosecutor for 21 years. The only other time I can think of a situation like this is from Trump 1.0. And there, what the judge did is he appointed somebody to represent the public interest.

He said, you know, I've got the government and the defense aligned here, but they may not be presenting everything because I have Danielle Sassoon's letter saying that's not what happened here. So Emmet Sullivan was in that situation and he appointed a former judge, John Gleeson, to represent and advocate with respect to the law and what else the judge should consider.

He said, you know, I've got the government and the defense aligned here, but they may not be presenting everything because I have Danielle Sassoon's letter saying that's not what happened here. So Emmet Sullivan was in that situation and he appointed a former judge, John Gleeson, to represent and advocate with respect to the law and what else the judge should consider.

It doesn't mean the judge had to agree with what that amicus said, but it was important to have another voice at the table when the whole idea is that there's a collusion between the government and the defense at issue.

It doesn't mean the judge had to agree with what that amicus said, but it was important to have another voice at the table when the whole idea is that there's a collusion between the government and the defense at issue.

Absolutely. So this is like music to my ears because I wrote a short piece for just security. Can I just give a big plug? Because even though I'm on the board there, the people who do the day-to-day work are so great. Trust Security is affiliated with NYU Law School where I teach. It's just a great place for independent, smart analysis. It's also got a litigation tracker.

Absolutely. So this is like music to my ears because I wrote a short piece for just security. Can I just give a big plug? Because even though I'm on the board there, the people who do the day-to-day work are so great. Trust Security is affiliated with NYU Law School where I teach. It's just a great place for independent, smart analysis. It's also got a litigation tracker.