Buzzfeed: GSA Attorney says Mueller obtained Trump emails legally

[marylandblue]

https://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/the-trump-campaign-claims-a-federal-office-illegally-turned?utm_term=.bdqMJJLnOy#.sbldYYW4j2

..."Career GSA staff, working with Mr. Loewentritt and at the direction of the FBI, immediately produced all the materials requested by the Special Counsel’s Office – without notifying TFA or filtering or redacting privileged material," Langhofer writes.

In a phone interview with BuzzFeed News on Saturday night, Loewentritt — whose LinkedIn represents that he has been at the agency since 1972 — disputed the claims made in the letter sent by the Trump campaign.

"Beckler never made that commitment," he said of the claim that any requests for transition records would be routed to the Trump campaign's counsel.

Specifically, Loewentritt said, "in using our devices," transition team members were informed that materials "would not be held back in any law enforcement" actions.

Loewentritt read to BuzzFeed News a series of agreements that anyone had to agree to when using GSA materials during the transition, including that there could be monitoring and auditing of devices and that, "Therefore, no expectation of privacy can be assumed."...

[Sophia4]

1. So, at worst, the e-mails can't be admitted at trial.

Or am I wrong?

If the e-mails were handed over to Mueller's investigation and theoretically, let's assume for the sake of argument that they should not have been handed over, how is that Mueller's fault.

Seems to me that the GSA personnel who handed them over would be at fault. I could be wrong about all of this, but it seems to me that Mueller would simply have requested the e-mails, and it was up to the GSA to decide whether to grant Mueller's request.

How in the world could this reflect negatively on Mueller, his team or his investigation?

Please explain!

[regnaD kciN]

4. I think you've got it backwards...

I think the point is that they obtained the e-mails legally, so they should be admissible everywhere (although that would, in the end, be up to the trial judge to decide). The overarching point is that, counter to what the Trumpistas are claiming, obtaining these e-mails was not an act of judicial malfeasance by Mueller, so it can't be used as justification for firing him.

[Sophia4]

18. Yes. The worst would be if the judge decided not to allow some of them

seems to me. I'm not saying that will happen. I'm just saying that would be the worst thing that could happen. Mueller probably did nothing wrong.

[marylandblue]

5. Yes, the emails can be suppressed at trial if a judge agrees, but

the article also directly contradicts that the transition team thought the emails were private. The GSA had everyone sign a standard disclosure that said they their emails are government property and not private. Therefore there is no privilege to assert and they knew it.

[calimary]

24. Ouch!

Man, if indeed they all signed such a standard disclosure, then yeah, sounds like they've created a big headache for themselves.

To which I say "GOOD!!!!!"

[shraby]

6. Because trump team wants to taint Mueller's work and get him thrown off the case. Otherwise

apparently Mueller minded his p's and q's and did things legally and it will be shown that is exactly what he did.

He's too smart to do something illegal that would put all his work in jeopardy.

[Roland99]

2. Mueller office determined a letter was sufficient.

The end of that article got vague

What letter?

How is that determined legal when the GSA suggested a warrant or subpoena?

[marylandblue]

8. In other words, both the GSA and Special Counsel agreed that no warrant was needed

FBI sent a letter request first and then GSA probably just wanted to be cautious and suggested they get a warrant. The FBI sent another letter and GSA agreed. If GSA really thought they needed a warrant, they would have insisted. But Mueller is correct. If its on a government computer, its government property and all the team members signed an acknowledgement of that.

[IluvPitties]

3. Right wingers are scared...

If there was nothing to hide in those emails, why the fuzz about Mueller having them?

[regnaD kciN]

7. Well, it's not just what's in the e-mails...

...it's that the investigators knew what was in them when they questioned White House staff -- who, unaware that the investigators had them, presumably lied through their teeth, not realizing that the proof that they lied was already at hand. That means lots of potential perjury charges -- which also means lots of White House staffers with a sudden strong motivation to cut a deal and turn state's evidence against their overseers.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

9. A beautiful thing.

[marylandblue]

10. But the only thing they would have lied about

Would have been the incriminated things Trump's lawyers did not turn over. Which must have been pretty damn incriminating.

[calimary]

23. That makes sense.

Not a lawyer here, but isn't it a long-running understanding that a lawyer should never ask a question he/she doesn't already know the answer to?

[Alice11111]

27. Hope your scenario is correct. You make good.points.

Hope has never gotten me much, but being stubborn, going forward while being called crazy and told to stop has. Not caving regardless.

Dems need to more aggressively defend and protect Mueller, rather than sit back and let the Foxapublicans demolish him w half the country. Just because we think these mob RWers are ridiculous, and they are slime, doesn't mean they won't prevail.

[calimary]

25. Welcome to DU, IluvPitties!

Indeed. If they've done nothing wrong, then certainly they shouldn't have a thing to worry about, 'eh?

Isn't that what they've always thrown back at us when they think it's to their advantage?

[Akoto]

11. So, that pretty much puts Mueller and team in the clear on the emails.

If no commitments were made and Trump's campaign signed an agreement which specifically states that no expectation of privacy can be assumed? That nothing would be held back from law enforcement? Then, nothing wrong was done and no warrant would be needed for Mueller to request the information.

It sounds to me like Trump's team didn't read the fine print before they signed on, just like most of us scroll straight through it prior to installing a new program.

[dawg day]

15. It doesn't even matter-

what "agreement" there was. It's like non-disclosure agreements-- they have no authority when there are criminal acts involved.

They're in major trouble.

[greatauntoftriplets]

12. The gang that can't shoot straight wouldn't know a law if it kicked them in the ass.

[TomSlick]

13. I've posted this elsewhere in a similar thread but

What kind of dimwit posts anything on a .gov e-mail system s/he doesn't want the cops to see? He's a good rule, anything you put on a computer than belongs to the government or your employer doesn't belong to you.

[dawg day]

14. That's all they got?

Emails done in government service -- paid for with govt $-- belong to the government.

And no one can make a commitment that says that law enforcement can be defied.

If this is the advice Trump is getting from his attorneys...

And isn't Ty Cobb paid by us? The taxpayers? Not Trump personally?

White House counsels like him should give John Dean a call. He'll tell them a government=paid attorney doesn't get to claim atty-client privilege and can even to to jail.

[DonaldsRump]

16. This is the letter that counsel to "Trump for America" sent to the Congressional committees

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000160-616c-dcd4-a96b-756de2a90000

Trump for America, apparently, is the same as the "Presidential Transition Team" or PTT.

Just like Richard Nixon's assertion of executive privilege about his own Watergate tapes, the lengths that these and other folks are going to in order to hide relevant documentation, by its very nature, suggests that they indeed have something to hide.

If they had nothing to hide, they could voluntarily release these documents and note that the release does not constitute a waiver of any alleged privilege.

[safeinOhio]

17. Even better. Where the lawyers

that deleted the evidence guilty of obstruction?

[Sophia4]

20. Good question.

[herding cats]

19. The .gov emails are the best evidence they could come up with against Mueller.

The texts were just a bit of fog, easily dismissed in a hearing due to the vast volume of Republican lawmakers who have said worse on the record. Imagine what they’ve said under the pretext of privacy?

This is their big “It” here. Their whole drama campaign on FOX News and all the Republican lawmakers gnashing of teeth we’ve been witnessing was for these. This moment. Even though it’s legal weak sauce and that’s being generous. The very fact that they sent a letter to Congress (not the WH legal counsel), and people from the transition team contacted Axios to “break” the story appears to support my assumption.

I realize the handing over of these is not a breach of etiquette, ethics nor is it illegal, but this was still their plan, and they know all that as well. They want to sway public opinion. It’s propaganda, plain and simple.

We, all of us who deal with any people who may swallow this whole, need to arm ourselves with facts. We need to stand strong on this one. Hit back with facts. I know some of them are beyond reach, better than most. I don’t even care anymore. Since politeness is a fast dying tradition, I suggest we give what we get, except fact based.

Also, we should call our representatives. All of them and voice our opinions on this outrageous maneuver of by the Republicans. Make your voices heard and tell all you know to do the same. Our Dem reps need our support, and those of us with Republican ones are too used to us not bothering them with our opinions because we know which way the wind blows for them. Actually, those of us with Republican Senators and Congress critters are the most important voices here. We need to organize more dissent in these areas, now more than ever.

Get angry people. Now is the time.

[L. Coyote]

21. Geeez, how else would he do it, call Putin?

"Oh Putie Poo, I need a hack job ...."

[joshcryer]

22. "appropriate criminal process" equals "warrants given"

This is very very fucking bad for Trump and co.

[Alice11111]

26. Of course we should expect them to fight back aggressively.

These are people who practically committed treason to win an election. Their lives and their family's lives, their wealth,.and that of their donors, in some cases, are in the line of fire w Muellet. This will be a fight to the death. Don't assume that just because Muellers got the goods, that justice will prevail. Justice is like fair elections. Sometimes it works, but often it doesn't. There is a lot of naivete here. They own SCOTUS now. Gorsuch. If things are appealed there, our chances are compromised.
These people could care less if poor people and uninsured kids die; they are not going to be gentleman and gentlewomen and defer to the law, Mueller, who they think is another Clinton Pizzagate.

I wouldn't say there is no hope, but this isn't just a matter of proving the truth. For starters, they will try to keep the truth out . If it does come out, the story will be it was done illegally (Dan Rather v Bush's military record). Then, it's fake news, just like the audio of Dump w Billy Bush.