Trump lawyers seek to narrow proposed limit on what he can say publicly in election case
Last edited Mon Aug 7, 2023, 08:32 PM - Edit history (2)
Source: NBC News
Donald Trump's lawyers asked a judge Monday to narrow the protective order federal prosecutors proposed last week to prohibit the former president from publicly disclosing certain evidence gathered in the special counsel's 2020 election probe.
In a 29-page filing, Trump’s attorneys called for a “less restrictive alternative” to the government’s order, framing their revisions as an effort aimed at “preserving the First Amendment rights of President Trump and the public.” Trump's lawyers argued that the government's proposal was "overbroad" and instead asked U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan of Washington, D.C., to adopt a revised order "to shield only genuinely sensitive materials from public view."
“The government requests the Court assume the role of censor and impose content-based regulations on President Trump’s political speech that would forbid him from publicly discussing or disclosing all non-public documents produced by the government, including both purportedly sensitive material and non sensitive potentially exculpatory documents," they wrote. That phrasing could require the judge to determine what would and would not pose a threat to witnesses, a process that could eat up hours of court time.
Prosecutors filed a response Monday night, defending their proposed order. "To facilitate the efficient production of discovery to the defense, the Government proposed a reasonable protective order consistent with current practice in this District," they wrote. "The defendant instead proposed an order designed to allow him to try this case in the media rather than in the courtroom."
Read more: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-seeks-narrow-special-counsels-proposed-protective-order-election-rcna98628
Article updated.
Previous article -
In a 29-page filing, Trump's attorneys called for a "less restrictive alternative" to the government's order, framing their revisions as an effort aimed at "preserving the First Amendment rights of President Trump and the public." Trump's lawyers argued that the government's proposal was "overbroad" and instead asked Judge Tanya Chutkan to adopt a revised order "to shield only genuinely sensitive materials from public view."
"The government requests the Court assume the role of censor and impose content-based regulations on President Trump's political speech that would forbid him from publicly discussing or disclosing all non-public documents produced by the government, including both purportedly sensitive material and non sensitive potentially exculpatory documents," they wrote.
The filing includes proposed changes that would narrow the scope of the limitations sought by the government. One of the revisions would allow Trump to publicly disclose recordings and transcripts of witness testimony that prosecutors obtained in the course of their investigation and are expected to turn over to the defense.
Original headline/article -
Donald Trump's lawyers on Monday asked a judge to narrow the protective order proposed by federal prosecutors last week aimed at prohibiting the former president from publicly disclosing certain evidence gathered during the special counsel's 2020 election probe.
In a 29-page filing, Trump's lawyers argued that the government's proposal was "overbroad" and instead asked Judge Tanya Chutkan to adopt a revised order "to shield only genuinely sensitive materials from public view."
"The government requests the Court assume the role of censor and impose content-based regulations on President Trump's political speech that would forbid him from publicly discussing or disclosing all non-public documents produced by the government, including both purportedly sensitive material and non sensitive potentially exculpatory documents," they wrote. A spokesperson for the special counsel's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
In their proposal Friday, prosecutors cited Trump's social media posts in asking the judge to prohibit the former president and his defense team from publicly disclosing certain evidence in the case. Trump's disclosure of details or grand jury transcripts "could have a harmful chilling effect on witnesses or adversely affect the fair administration of justice in this case," the prosecutors argued in their motion.
= new reply since forum marked as read
even being on all the political talk shows over the weekend they come up with 29 pages ... of delay B.S. SMH. These guys are clowns. 
with their sidelong contempt-driven, twisting of judicial ethics, with their "proposing" that the destructive, defamatory messaging of their client has no bearing on the court conditions for her, court officials, and the tenor of the trial.
Good luck telling a federal judge how to decide what communications are sensitive, and in effect, how to run her court. Telling a federal judge what her protective order judgment should entail?? Puh-lease.
Too stupid to be shady, these lawyers are just an embarrassment to their profession.
They'll fuck around and find out. She don't go for doing what Trump tells them to say. She don't play.
It seems that a merely limited protective order would require discretion on the part of defendant's counsel (or in this case, discretion on the part of defendant who doesn't listen to counsel) not to make any revelations, but it's been proven that discretion doesn't exist.
Or it's possible I don't know what I'm talking about. 
