Judge in Trump's classified docs case grants prosecutor's request to keep names of government witnesses secret

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: NBC News

April 9, 2024, 9:10 PM EDT


The judge overseeing former President Donald Trump's classified documents case handed federal prosecutors a partial victory Tuesday in a monthslong dispute by granting their request to keep the names of government witnesses sealed. U.S. District Judge Aileen issued the 24-page order in response to special counsel Jack Smith's request to reconsider a previous order that the government said could lead more than two dozen potential government witnesses in the Florida case to be publicly identified.

Under Cannon's new order, potential witnesses’ names will be redacted, though significant parts of witness statements to investigators may be made public. Cannon said redacting identifiable information would address Smith's safety concerns for potential witnesses, making it unnecessary to grant his "wholesale request to seal non-identifying substantive witness statements."

She also criticized Smith in her order, arguing that his arguments and evidence should have been raised earlier. "Although the record is clear that the Special Counsel could have, and should have, raised its current arguments previously, the Court elects, upon a full review of those newly raised arguments, to reconsider its prior Order," Cannon said.

A spokesperson for Smith’s office declined to comment on the order and instead pointed to the special counsel’s court filings about the matter. Trump’s lawyers did not immediately respond to a request for comment Tuesday night.

Read more: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/judge-trump-classified-docs-case-keep-government-witnesses-secret-rcna147120

---

Link to RULING (PDF) - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652.438.0.pdf

[mucifer]

1. I have resigned myself to the belief that the case will only happen after

the election if trump loses. If Jack Smith can't figure out a way to get cannon off the case, she will dismiss it then.

The Jan 6 case seems more plausible for a good outcome IMO.

That said, if he can get cannon off the case, it's great they have the witnesses secret.

[keopeli]

2. I fear you are correct. For such a heinous crime, a judge should not be able to completely exhonerate the criminal

and with no recourse. I had no idea that a corrupt judge in a criminal case could basically acquit the defendant. Of all the indictments, this is the most clear-cut case and the defendant committed the crime with knowledge of forethought. It is the most likely the worst act of espionage in our nation's history. He deserves to be remembered for his treason, like Benedict Arnold. Yet, a single corrupt judge can change history's judgement. Like you say, without a new judge, Cannon will find a way to dismiss with prejudice, making her just as complicit in the treason as TSF. What a sorry state of affairs our once lauded country is in.

[SallyHemmings]

5. I agree

Cannon is terrible.

[SalamanderSleeps]

3. My, my how clever.

No one would ever suspect that a member of the Federalist's Society would use the legal system to subvert justice.

It's all high school to them.

What a complete waste of a Michigan education.

When will we be rid of these Fuking Putinistas?

Vote goddamit, vote!

[slightlv]

4. Wait a minute... i remember this issue

Being brought up long prior to this... or was that in another case? I swear early dementia is hitting cannon.

[BumRushDaShow]

7. It has come up for pretty much ALL of his cases (e.g., GA & NY)

but in this particular one, she initially rejected the request until last evening when she reversed herself.

[slightlv]

8. So she did lie in saying smith

Had not brought it to her attention before now?! Man I am so tired of this crap. This should be an open and shut case... its so infuriating. He should be under the same restraints as the Rosenbergs... and get the same treatment. Talk about slapping all of us veterans on the face! And yet WE don't have a voice in any of this.

This is Why I say we're going to need a truth and reconciliation commission at some point, where ordinary citizens can speak their mind to all this crap. Unfortunately I figure I'll be dead and buried b4 anything like that happens. Truth is, we have no voice any longer. We vote. And the winners do what and how they want..
Not what we the people want. Why did I lose amily in WWII? What was the point of my own service?

Sorry... im in the crash part of 2 days of adrenalin getting hubs through his heart attack. I have so much to do and get organized here the best thing is to probably let all that news go on without me for now. There's only so much anger and fear a person can handle.

[BumRushDaShow]

10. Yes, she is a serial liar. One of his initial requests came back in Feburary

Feds investigate threats to potential witness in Trump Mar-a-Lago documents case


Feb. 8, 2024, 2:17 PM EST / Updated Feb. 8, 2024, 2:44 PM EST
By Rebecca Shabad


A potential government witness in the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case against former President Donald Trump has received online threats that are now under federal investigation, special counsel Jack Smith said in a new court filing.

Smith requested permission from U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon to file an exhibit under seal until the federal probe is either closed or resolved by adjudication. The special counsel's office also wants to bar Trump's legal team from viewing the exhibit.

"The exhibit describes in some detail threats that have been made over social media to a prospective Government witness and surrounding circumstances, and the fact that those threats are the subject of an ongoing federal investigation being handled by a United States Attorney's Office," Smith wrote in the motion, which was filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

He added, "Disclosure of the details and circumstances of the threats risks disrupting the investigation."

(snip)

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/feds-investigate-threats-potential-witness-trump-mar-lago-documents-ca-rcna137959

She apparently said no and he protested -

Special counsel fights judge’s order allowing Trump to reveal witness identities in Mar-a-Lago case

by Rebecca Beitsch - 02/09/24 11:45 AM ET


Special counsel Jack Smith is asking Judge Aileen Cannon to reconsider a ruling that would allow former President Trump’s legal team to publicly disclose witness identities and their testimony to the court docket. Trump’s lawyers have sought to attach evidence given to them during the discovery process in other court filings set to be publicly posted in connection with the Mar-a-Lago documents case.

The Justice Department argued late Thursday that Cannon erred in her legal rationale for allowing them to do so, a decision they say risks exposing some two dozen witnesses to harassment, as she requires no redactions.

“That discovery material, if publicly docketed in unredacted form as the Court has ordered, would disclose the identities of numerous potential witnesses, along with the substance of the statements they made to the FBI or the grand jury, exposing them to significant and immediate risks of threats, intimidation, and harassment,” prosecutors wrote in the 22-page filing.

It’s something they say “has already happened to witnesses, law enforcement agents, judicial officers, and Department of Justice employees whose identities have been disclosed in cases in which defendant Trump is involved.”

(snip)

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4458476-special-counsel-fights-judges-order-allowing-trump-to-reveal-witness-identities-in-mar-a-lago-case/

A month later, he came back again in March with more examples in a filing -

Jack Smith Sounds Alarm About Threat to Trump Witnesses

Published Mar 08, 2024 at 8:26 AM EST


By Sean O'Driscoll
Senior Crime and Courts Reporter

Witnesses have been threatened in Donald Trump's classified documents case in Florida, the chief prosecutor has warned. Jack Smith previously told the court that he wanted to remove the names and details of witnesses from court documents because he didn't want a repeat of threats made by Trump supporters in other cases involving the former president.

Trump is facing 40 federal charges over his handling of sensitive materials retrieved from his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida, after leaving the White House in January 2021. He is accused of obstructing efforts by federal authorities to return them. Trump has pleaded not guilty to all charges. Newsweek reached out to Trump's attorney via email for comment on Friday.

Smith previously told Judge Aileen Cannon that he opposes the public release of the names or job titles of witnesses, fearing that they will be the subject of a hate campaign by Trump supporters.

In a filing late on Thursday, Smith revealed that witnesses have now received threats in the classified documents case. Smith wrote that prosecutors are seeking "minimal" redaction on 13 pages to avoid identifying witnesses.

(snip)

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-jack-smith-witness-threats-mar-lago-classified-documents-fbi-1877237

And with respect to your hubby - am sending you healing thoughts through this trying time. Don't forget to take care of yourself too.

[onenote]

12. The sad but true fact is that the prosecutors initially did a terrible job opposing disclosure

Last edited Wed Apr 10, 2024, 01:20 PM - Edit history (1)

The decision issued by Cannon arises in connection with a defense request made in January to "un-redact" certain information, including witness names and witness statements, that previously were provided by the government to Trump and his lawyers in discovery. That information is subject to a protective order that prevents it from being disclosed to the public unless the Special Counsel consents or the court approves. Trump submitted a discovery-related filing in which, consistent with the protective order, he redacted certain information, but he asked the court to allow it to be re-submitted on the public docket without redactions. Smith opposed un-redacting the information because, among other things, it could lead to attempts to harass or intimidate witnesses or to witness coordination. Cannon initially granted Trump's request, in part because, to be honest, the Special Counsel did a surprisingly bad job in its opposition -- among other things, failing to discuss the appropriate legal standard for deciding whether to allow public disclosure or offering any specific factual evidence in support. Smith then filed a motion for reconsideration which does a much better job of making the legal and factual case for not un-redacting. Cannon then suspended her order pending a decision on the motion for reconsideration. After receiving Trump's opposition to the motion for reconsideration, and holding a hearing at the beginning of March, Cannon has finally issued an order granting the motion for reconsideration in part and denying it in part.

In short, Cannon is not "lying" when she points out that the prosecution didn't provide specific legal and factual arguments in support of its request to keep the information in question sealed when it filed that request. The Special Counsel essentially acknowledged this in its motion for reconsideration when it recognized that motions for reconsideration should not be used to present new evidence or argument but suggested that it didn't think it was required to provide such information with its request to keep the information sealed.

On the other hand, Cannon's opinion is wildly defensive and goes out of its way to attack the Special Counsel's position, even as it ends up agreeing with it in part. Moreover, Cannon goes out of her way to limit the scope of her order. I don't have any idea whether Smith will go to the appellate court to challenge that part of her order that allows the disclosure of witness statements, although I wouldn't be surprised if he decides not to do so.

[Lovie777]

6. This judge don't give a shit about the USA's security.....................

shithole is a danger to America. So is his cult.

[Novara]

9. Wrong headline again

It is a PARTIAL grant. Smith has to justify keeping EACH witness secret. She can overrule him on any of the witnesses.

The moment she refuses to protect some of them is the moment she is closest to being recused. She knows this. She is playing games.

[onenote]

13. Where does her decision say that?

[Novara]

15. From the filing:

Page 15.

More specifically, under a blanket protective order issued upon a generalized “good cause” showing, as is in effect here [ECF No. 27; see ECF No. 23], the party seeking to maintain the seal carries the burden in the face of document-specific challenges. Chicago Tribune Co., 263 F.3d at 1307 (explaining that a blanket protective order merely “postpones the necessary showing of ‘good cause’ required for entry of a protective order until the confidential designation [of a document] is challenged”); In re Alexander Grant, 820 F.2d at 356 (same); Pansy, 23 F.3d at 787 n.17 (same); Bulger, 286 F.R.D. at 52–53 (collecting cases). Because Defendants challenged the designation of the discovery materials referenced in support of their MTC [ECF No. 261 p. 2], the burden of making document specific “good cause” showings falls to the Special Counsel.

She is putting the burden on Smith. Throughout the document she implies that Smith's request to keep witnesses' identities and certain materials under seal was much too broad, and she leaves the door open to Smith justifying why the portions she denied should not be denied.

[onenote]

16. She stated the standard. She then applied it and found that with respect to witness ID, he had satisfied it.

The sentence that follows the language you quoted states: "Applying these legal principles to the voluminous record, the Court addresses below the categories of information subject to the Special Counsel’s seal requests." The decision then goes on to state that "the Court is satisfied that the Special Counsel has made an adequate showing on this issue under Rule 16, at least at this juncture pending final trial preparations. The Court directs the Special Counsel, consistent with the instructions below... to file under seal an index containing the name of each potential government witness and a corresponding pseudonym/anonymization for use in the redactions of Defendants’ MTC.

The order then directs the parties to file public versions of the motion to compel, response and reply consistent with the order using the pseudonyms.

It is a partial grant because she granted Smith's request to keep the witness names and PII sealed, but allowed public disclosure of portions of witness statements with the names and PII redacted.

[Novara]

18. Which is a pretty big problem, IMO

She is allowing witness statements to become public so long as the identities are shielded. However, the potential is that making these statements public could influence other witness testimony or be read by prospective jurors or even have enough identifying material in them that the identity of the witness will be revealed. And we all know that anybody connected to any of these cases can very easily become targets.

[bluestarone]

20. I get very confudsed by your answers sometimes. (I feel that you continue to state that Jack messes up)

Then you state that you support the way he files his response? That very much confuses me to the point that i'm not sure WHO you're supporting. Surely this judge IS trying to support TFG every which way she can! I see it, others here see it as well. It's just crazy for her to allow what they say but thinking by with holding names it's ok? No way do i believe that's what should be allowed.

[BlueKota]

11. I wish he could get her tossed.

[Zincwarrior]

14. Interesting. Sounds like a mob trial

Sounds like something done when the defendants are in a gang or organized crime.

[cstanleytech]

17. Loose Cannon is really going that extra mile to shield Dishonest Donny but then again she dies owe him big time.

[republianmushroom]

19. 38 months and counting (includes foot dragging)