Trump valet's lawyer admits they have no case to back up latest argument: ex-DOJ official

Donald Trump's valet, Walt Nauta, went to court for a hearing Wednesday, alleging he was being unfairly persecuted by the Justice Department in the classified documents case before Judge Aileen Cannon.

Speaking to MSNBC host Nicolle Wallace, Brandon Van Grack, a former national security official for the Justice Department, said that Nauta's own lawyer confessed their complaints weren't even valid.

Donald Trump has worked to delay the case, in which he's charged under the Espionage Act. While Trump continues to claim he is the victim of vindictive prosecution and a political witch hunt, Nauta motioned to dismiss the charges against him because of this.

Want more breaking political news? Click for the latest headlines at Raw Story.

ALSO READ: A criminologist explains why Judge Cannon must step away from Trump trial immediately

"What you see is extensive hearing, after hearing, after hearing on various motions, including the ones today on selective and vindictive prosecution," he said. "Even though that opinion that you just read showed sort of how not vindictive and selective, but how targeted and justified the conduct was."

Van Grack explained that the hearing revealed an "acknowledgment that there was no evidence" that the DOJ was "vindictive toward the defendant."

"The closest they came with a disputed conversation, with respect — about Walt Nada's attorneys. His counsel," he cited. "And it appeared that even his counsel acknowledged that this wasn't sufficient. And I say that because Judge Cannon didn't need a hearing to rule on that."

Most of the time, judges use paper filings to make decisions on issues like that. Cannon didn't, and by not doing so, she added to the trial's delay.

"But instead, there was a hearing, not even combined with other issues, a hearing specifically on this point which just shows, I think, further evidence that this court really finds something very sympathetic about these arguments made even if there doesn't seem to be evidence to support them," he said.

Wallace compared Judge Cannon to the Washington, D.C. judge, Beryl Howell, who ruled that Trump's lawyer could be questioned about the classified documents because the attorney/client privilege was breached as it was in furtherance of a crime.

Howell has presided over many cases involving classified materials. Cannon reportedly has none under her belt.

"Part of this is, to underscore your point, there is overwhelming evidence that classified information was stored in Mar-a-Lago where it was not allowed to be," Van Grack explained. "And was not produced to the government. What was released, or unsealed, I should say, just furthers that, as Carol Lenonnig said, it's not new. And the judge has seen it."

See the comments below or at the link.

Trump valet’s lawyer admits they have no case on ‘vindictive prosecution’: ex-DOJ official www.youtube.com

Recommended Links: