web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > Posts tagged "evidence"

Omarosa: White House destroyed evidence meant for Mueller investigation

Westlake Legal Group omarosa-white-house-destroyed-evidence-meant-for-mueller-investigation Omarosa: White House destroyed evidence meant for Mueller investigation The Blog Omarosa Manigault-Newman Mueller Investigation MSNBC evidence campaign emails Al Sharpton

Westlake Legal Group OmarosaManigaultNewmanandTrump715 Omarosa: White House destroyed evidence meant for Mueller investigation The Blog Omarosa Manigault-Newman Mueller Investigation MSNBC evidence campaign emails Al Sharpton

Omarosa Manigault Newman is at it again. Saturday she appeared on Al Sharpton’s show on MSNBC, I know, and made a remarkable claim. The former member of the Trump administration claimed that five boxes of evidence that should have gone to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation team were destroyed.

Offering no concrete evidence to support such a serious allegation, Omarosa recounted her experience with former Chief of Staff John Kelly when he fired her in December 2017.

“I think it’s important to realize that very early on in the administration, we got letters directing us to preserve all information related to the Mueller investigation, all investigations, any information, any emails, any correspondence. We had a clear directive to preserve those documents, preserve emails, preserve text messages,” she said in an interview with MSNBC’s “PoliticsNation with Al Sharpton.”

“So I thought it was very interesting that after my discussion with General Kelly in the Situation Room when I went to take my things, I was instructed that I had to leave seven boxes of documents that came from the campaign, the inauguration, the transition, and they would not allow me to get them,” Ms. Manigault Newman said, referring to former Chief of Staff John F. Kelly.

Omarosa went on to justify her claim by saying emails after her dismissal only reference two boxes that she left behind, not seven. She jumped to the conclusion that five boxes must have been destroyed. This is a leap, to be sure, yet this is what we have come to expect from her.

‘What’s very curious to me is that, as I stated, it was seven boxes of documents, and in my emails, they only referenced two, which leads me to believe that they’ve destroyed the other five,’ Manigault Newman said.

Here is what is “very curious” to me – why did a White House employee think she was entitled to take home boxes of materials that related to the campaign and her work in the White House? Her job in the Trump administration wasn’t her first experience working in the White House. She served as an assistant to the president and director of communications for the Office of Public Liaison for Trump. In the 1990s Omarosa worked in the office of Vice-President Al Gore. She was later re-assigned to the Commerce Department.

Work-related paperwork and emails are the property of management, in this case, the White House and not the individual employee. Often a person in a sensitive position is given little or no notice of dismissal and only allowed to gather up personal items like a handbag or briefcase while being escorted from the premises by a security guard. Yes, that sounds very cloak and dagger but you get the picture. It isn’t unusual that she wasn’t allowed to haul out seven boxes of work product.

Omarosa went further and said she thinks more documents were destroyed that should have gone to Mueller’s investigation.

‘I believe I’m not the only one who’s been subjected to this type of treatment, and I believe that there are more documents that have been destroyed by this administration,’ she said.

Manigault Newman said she never saw the boxes again and assumed that the Trump administration would not have handed them over to the special counsel, as her legal team would’ve had to be informed if they had been.

The former contestant of The Apprentice went onto add that, based on emails she’d received from administration officials about the documents, it appeared that at least five of the seven boxes had been destroyed.

When show host Al Sharpton asked for clarification purposes if she was saying that the Trump administration destroyed five boxes, she replied, “‘Oh, there’s no question.’ So, she clearly staked out her position. She accused the administration of behavior she claims is standard procedure with them.

This all sounds like sour grapes from a disgruntled former Trump administration staffer. Perhaps she was looking for some attention and Sharpton was happy to provide her the opportunity to toss red meat to those in #TheResistance. It’s been a minute since she’s surfaced on television and her book tour is long over.

‘We’ll have to see what unfolds,’ she continued. ‘But I’m sure that I’m just not a one off. I believe that this is a pattern with this administration of being disrespectful to congressional requests, of trying to use intimidation and all types of tactics to keep people silent,’ the former White House aide told MSNBC.

During an interview on another MSNBC show in April Omarosa made similar claims to host Craig Melvin so maybe she doesn’t think enough attention was paid to her accusations.

‘We should really not just focus on what [Trump] is telling people to do or say, but how he’s asked people to destroy documents, to destroy e-mails ― in my case, two boxes of campaign-related materials the White House still has in their possession that they claim they don’t have or don’t know what happened to it,’ Manigault Newman said at that time.

Melvin asked her whether the Trump administration had directed her to destroy evidence.

Manigault Newman said that while she had not been explicitly told to do so, ‘they were very clear about not wanting us to share those things.’

‘Right after the campaign, the day after, they took our e-mails down and told us we had no access to it … They were certainly working to try to hide the things we now know are involved with this investigation,’ she alleged.

Given that Mueller found no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin, the hopes of Trump’s opponents wishing him to be frog-marched out of the Oval Office are gone. All that is left is bickering over instances of obstruction listed in the Mueller report that didn’t rise to an actionable level. Omarosa’s claim of evidence being destroyed falls into the obstruction category. It should be taken with a very large grain of salt.

The post Omarosa: White House destroyed evidence meant for Mueller investigation appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group OmarosaManigaultNewmanandTrump715-300x163 Omarosa: White House destroyed evidence meant for Mueller investigation The Blog Omarosa Manigault-Newman Mueller Investigation MSNBC evidence campaign emails Al Sharpton   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Can Bob Kraft really quash the evidence against him?

Westlake Legal Group can-bob-kraft-really-quash-the-evidence-against-him Can Bob Kraft really quash the evidence against him? Video trial The Blog Robert Kraft prostitution Florida evidence

Westlake Legal Group kraft-nbc Can Bob Kraft really quash the evidence against him? Video trial The Blog Robert Kraft prostitution Florida evidence

Last time we heard from New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft regarding his upcoming trial on charges of soliciting prostitutes, I found his legal team’s strategy a bit on the odd side. His lawyers entered a not guilty plea on all charges, but only after he issued a formal apology for the way he had “disappointed everyone” and let down all of the fans. That seemed like poor planning to me, but perhaps he’s playing a longer game here and sees a way out of this trap. This week his attorneys have been busy trying to get the court to throw out some of the main evidence against him. That would be some video supposedly showing him engaging in sexual activity with a prostitute and paying her. Can he do that? (Boston Globe)

Media outlets seeking access to video evidence in Robert Kraft’s prostitution case in Florida are chasing “eyeballs and clicks” for their websites by publishing footage that is “basically pornography,” a lawyer for the New England Patriots owner said Friday.

William Burck made the assertion during a hearing in Palm Beach County, where the 77-year-old billionaire faces two misdemeanor counts of soliciting prostitution at a Jupiter spa in January.

Kraft has denied engaging in illegal activity, pleaded not guilty, and requested a jury trial. Video cameras secretly installed by police, pursuant to a warrant, allegedly captured Kraft receiving sexual favors in exchange for cash inside the Orchids of Asia Day Spa on two consecutive days.

So these are two separate motions that the judge has to consider. One calls for any video held by the prosecution to be sealed and not released to the public. That one is easy enough to understand. Kraft doesn’t want the embarrassment of having such videos showing up on cable news and having the trial held in the press before they ever get to a courtroom. (And let’s be honest… do you really want to see that?)

The second part is trickier. His attorneys want the video suppressed so that prosecutors won’t be able to show it to a jury during the trial. As far as I know, claiming that a video amounts to being “basically pornography” is not grounds for striking it from evidence. Generally, when something like this is suppressed, it’s because there are questions over whether or not there was a valid reason for the activity to be legally recorded or if the person was being unfairly targeted without probable cause.

In this case, law enforcement had obtained a warrant and installed the cameras in advance, suspecting that prostitution was taking place. To the best of my knowledge, they didn’t even know Kraft would be in the vicinity before he allegedly showed up on film. It’s difficult to imagine a set of circumstances where the judge allows the video to be tossed out unless there was some problem with the initial warrant that we haven’t heard about yet. Kraft has no claim to privacy since he was in a public place of business, not his own home or office.

Of course, if his lawyers somehow succeed in blocking the video, that will significantly weaken the prosecution’s case. At that point there could be all manner of “he said, she said” arguments as to what went on inside that spa. And if that’s the case, perhaps Kraft and his team are smarter than all the rest of us. If their strategy works, this story might have a happy ending for him after all. (Oh, come on… you knew I couldn’t finish the entire article without one happy ending joke.)

The post Can Bob Kraft really quash the evidence against him? appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group kraft-nbc-300x162 Can Bob Kraft really quash the evidence against him? Video trial The Blog Robert Kraft prostitution Florida evidence   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com