The special master tasked with reviewing over 11,000 papers confiscated from Mar-a-Lago made a preposterous request, which the judge promptly denied.
He urged the former president’s counsel to certify, within eight days, whether all of the more than 11,000 papers were true.
The Western Journal claimed that not only would it be an enormous undertaking, but the attorneys have not viewed every document since some are classified.
It was a request so ludicrous that it was denied by the same federal court who had appointed the special master.
U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon decided on Thursday, one day before the deadline, that Trump would not be required to comply, according to UPI.
“There shall be no separate requirement on Plaintiff at this stage, prior to the review of any of the seized materials,” the judge said.
“The Court’s Appointment Order did not contemplate that obligation,” she said.
The directive had been issued by senior federal Judge Raymond Dearie — appointed to assess whether some of the documents seized in the Aug. 8 raid were privileged — who wished to address implications from Trump on social media that the FBI might have planted evidence during the raid.
Even though there were over 11,000 papers, Dearie requested Trump’s team to identify things in the inventory “that plaintiff asserts were not seized from the premises.”
“This submission shall be plaintiff’s [Trump’s] final opportunity to raise any factual dispute as to the completeness and accuracy of the Detailed Property Inventory,” he said.
But around 100 of the documents were marked classified with limited the former president’s attorneys from seeing them.
More on this story via Conservative Brief:
“Additionally, Plaintiff currently has no means of accessing the documents bearing classification markings, which would be necessary to complete any such certification by September 30, the currently proposed date of completion,” the former president’s attorneys said.
The judge said that “[s]hould any additional matters surface during the Special Master’s review process that requires reconsideration of the Inventory or the need to object to its contents, the parties shall make those matters known to the Special Master for appropriate resolution and recommendation to this Court.” CONTINUE READING…