‘Pay Invoices Promptly When Rendered’: Justice Department Throws Shade in Brutal Filing Knocking Down Trump Complaints
L, C: Alex Kent/Getty Images R: Jeff Swensen/Getty Images
Department of Justice lawyers threw unsubtle shade at former President Donald Trump in a brutal filing knocking down his legal team’s complaints – and reminding Trump to “pay invoices promptly when rendered.”
Justice Department prosecutors filed a motion this week to Special Master in the Mar-a-Lago probe Judge Raymond Dearie — who was hand-picked by Team Trump but has not been working out great for them.
The motion was filed by U.S. Attorney Juan Antonio Gonzalez, Assistant Attorney General Matthew Olsen, and the Counterintelligence and Export Control Section (CES) of DoJ’s National Security Division Chief Jay Bratt, Deputy Chief Julie Edelstein, and trial attorney Stephen Marzen.
For several paragraphs, the DoJ discusses the hiring of a vendor who can come closest to meeting the deadline to scan all the documents, at one point reminding Trump — through his attorneys — that “the government expects Plaintiff to pay the vendor’s invoices promptly when rendered.”
Trump had attempted to get taxpayers to split the bill for the special master review, but the judge ordered him to pay the full cost. Trump has a lengthy and well-publicized history of less-than-prompt-and-or-complete payment of his debts.
The government team then took brutal aim at complaints Team Trump had made in an earlier filing under seal.
“Plaintiff makes three objections to the Amended Case Management Plan. Although the three objections are different, all are without merit,” they wrote, then produced arguments that included copious lawsplaining, unsolicited advice for Team Trump, and asserting that one of the objections “has no logical basis”:
Second, that the Amended Case Management Plan has six categories (ECF 112, at 3) and the Appointment Order four (ECF 91, at 1) is entirely a function of the fact that the four categories in the Appointment Order speak of “privilege” in general and do not (as the Amended Case Management Plan does) differentiate between attorney-client and Executive privilege. The Amended Case Management Plan is entirely consistent with the Appointment Order. Plaintiff’s objection has no logical basis.
Finally, the DoJ team closed with a kicker that drew complaints of “lecturing” and “antagonistic comments” from Team Trump, and which seemed to reflect the government’s assessment of how things are going with Judge Dearie.
“Plaintiff brought this civil, equitable proceeding. He bears the burden of proof. If he wants the Special Master to make recommendations as to whether he is entitled to the relief he seeks, Plaintiff will need to participate in the process by categorizing documents and providing sworn declarations as the Amended Case Management Plan contemplates,” they wrote.
