Dear Rudy & Victoria so a Special Master it is. Man Grand Jury since 2019? -“and others” I’m here for it...
HOLY CRAP - FALSE CLAIMS ACT?!? I need a moment with the various court documents. “In the Matter of Search Warrants Executed on April 28, 2021” - what if I told you there are more than two?
The fact the parties (mainly the Government) are largely in agreement and the Court granted the Government’s request to appoint a Special Master. If you had the occasion to follow me on Twitter —I think you’ll recall that long running Threads of Michael Cohen Search Warrant1. …the commonality?
Attorney Client Privilege23 is a cornerstone (or bedrock) in the within the legal Community - although that privilege it’s not as ubiquitous as most incorrectly assume it is.
Under oath a Federal Law Enforcement Officer submits an affidavit. Generally speaking the Affidavit includes relevant finding of facts, recitation of the criminal statute(s)/law) may have been violated, witness(es) statements, fruits of judicially authorized surveillance.
The Court/Judge agrees that the facts with statement of facts.
When Fed Law Enforcement executes a judicially authorized search and seizure warrant - Judge agrees that the facts within the affidavit have met the probable cause threshold.
a privilege review of the documents, includes, various electronic laptops, tablets, smartphone(s), thumb drives and other seized items from Giuliani and Toensign, offices
simplistically speaking: when investigators serve a warrant on an attorney, particularly one that is viewed as very high profile attorney. Both the investigating agents and the USAO tend take extra “due care” because of the attorney client privilege.
Filter Teams or Taint Teams -remember these are typically career DOJ Attorneys who are not part of the investigatory or prosecution team(s) a Taint/Filter team’s main purpose is to act like an agnostic gatekeeper but keeping “privilege” intact is paramount.
Occasionally targets of a criminal investigation will make a lot of noise, especially if the target is a practicing attorney. Because from their point of view they are an “officer of the court” and Attorney/Client Privilege isn’t to be trifled with. Conversely the notion that “taint/filer” teams are not enough to protect privileged communications and/or documents — these kind of arguments tend to be meritless and unpersuasive… such is the case of the Giuliani & Toensing search warrants.
Special Master it is…
…the Government’s request to appoint a special master is granted and Giuliani’s and Toensing’s requests are denied SDNYGiuliani and Toensing have filed letters raising concerns about the searches and making certain requests in connection with them. (Dkt. Nos. 14, 15.)
For the reasons that follow, the Government’s request to appoint a special master is granted and Giuliani’s and Toensing’s requests are denied.4
Your honor -Subpoenas are like a judicially authorized search and seizure warrants, right? Please say yes…
I kid you not …yes both Giuliani and Toensing asked the Court to essentially toss out the fruits of the search and seizure the lawful and judicially approved search & seizure warrants. Alternatively Giuliani and Toensing argued that the Court should order the Government to proceed strictly via subpoena. There. Is. No. Legal. Basis. For. Giuliani/Toensign’s request. ButHoly Shittlestix -JD Sweet baby Jesus take the wheel. Also take note of which case the Court cited
In effect, they ask the Court to require the Government to proceed by subpoena rather than by search warrant. Guiliani’s and Toensing’s position lacks legal support. The search warrants at issue here were based on judicial findings of probable cause — supported by detailed affidavits — to believe that evidence of violations of specified federal offenses would be found at the locations to be searched.
SDNY May 28, 2021 Order Re Giuliani Toensing S&SW and Appointment of Special Master
There is no legal requirement for the Government to proceed by subpoena, nor is there any basis for the subject of an investigation to require it to do so.
Firstly -you need to understand there are/were two search warrants for 2021. Out of two different federal districts.
Secondly -it is unclear why no one else picked up on this incontrovertible fact, in 2019 Federal Investigators obtained TWO lawful search warrants for BOTH Giuliani and Toensing’s respective iCloud(s) - this is pretty important and I’m vexed at how a majority of the MSM and Twitter overlooked this important fact. Also if Rudy Giuliani was intellectually honest he would be forced to acknowledge that it was the Trump/Barr DOJ who obtained a “lawful” search and seizure warrant in 2019 for his iCloud. Weird how he and Vic consistently overlook this undisputed fact.
Again this bears repeating Giuliani and Toensing’s repeating the lie that the Government “illegal snooped my iCloud in 2019” or (Giuliani’s recent walk back) “the Government covertly obtained access to my iCloud” is literally garbage. The Government has zero obligation to “seek permission” from the target of a years long criminal investigation. FFS how are Giuliani and Toensing still allowed to practice law? Because this is basic law “stuff” 101 and the mendacity of both targets is - laughable and sad.
Giuliani and Toensing also seek the “return” of the results from earlier search warrants of their iCloud and email accounts, which were issued in 2019 pursuant to the Stored Communications Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2701 et seq.
SDNY -May 28, 2021 Order re S&SW and
Government represents that it has utilized a “filter team”…Only those materials determined by the filter team to be not potentially privileged have been released to the investigative team, according to the Government.
HOLY GOD Pre-Indictment and Grand Jury
Look I get it that most people read court filings and it’s like reading Greek - but if you pay attention to what I am highlighting and underlining that’s me saying “tune out the Twitter Garbage and Focus, I need you to focus on the facts in the filings and disregard Twitter’s QANON-for-the-Left…” —Who thinks they are now the foremost legal expert (guess the faux intelligence expert thingy kind of spectacularly blew up in their face) but still tweets gifs of “I plead the fifth”
You don’t plead the Fifth, you invoke it on specific questions and you shouldn’t mislead your followers with your really shitty legal takes. You are benching way out of your intellectual league. Furthermore you are messing with your followers heads by continuing to mislead them with your QANON-for-the-Left garbage, but I digress (again)
I now refer you to page 4 - just read it because those are the unassailable facts. The Court isn’t overly gregarious in their order , no they are sticking to the facts and it’s amazing because it’s there in black and white. Pre-Indictment, on going Grand Jury investigation and Filter Team…
Court finds that the filter team process adequately safeguards the attorney client privilege and the constitutional rights of the search subjects and their clients…
Giuliani and Toensing also seek pre-indictment discovery of the Government’s privilege and responsiveness designations in connection with the 2019 warrants…There is no basis for compelling the Government to produce this information now, during an ongoing grand jury investigation.
Rudy that’s not how this works. How have you not been disbarred?
In Section C Search Warrant Affidavit -the Court essentially annihilated Giuliani’s arguments specifically his assertions (about the 2019 and 2021 Warrants) that he has a right to “challenge their legality”.
NOT. AT. THIS. STAGE. RUDY. Moreover Rudy failed to cite any case law and as the Court made clear they are “unaware of no authority”…where there’s some secret or magically power within the Fourth Amendment that allows for a person/target who has yet to be charged “a right to review a search warrant affidavit during an ongoing investigation..”
Moreover in the context of the Court’s opinion, broadly speaking it is also worth noting that footnote # 3 is kind of spectacular both in terms of substance and style:
Giuliani & Toensing Motions are Premature - at this stage
Assuming that the search warrant affidavits are “judicial documents” to which the First Amendment and common law right of access applies, the Court finds that the presumption of access is plainly outweighed by the need to protect a grand jury investigation that is ongoing.
Giuliani is charged with a crime, of course, he will be entitled to production of the search warrant affidavits as part of discovery pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16. He will also be able to file motions challenging the warrants under Rule 12. But such disclosure is premature at the present stage. This request is therefore denied.
Government lawfully obtained warrants for Toensing’s iCloud & email account
Just to be clear one needs to not only understand the judicial process, particularly in the investigatory stage, “probable cause” and then run a general search in the correct Federal District Court’s ECF to eventually find the Search Warrant dated November 4, 2019, 19 Mag. 10364 (iCloud) but Toensing’sattemptto effectively “claw back” materials lawfully seized by an actual warrant —its both odd and clearly the Court understood the subtext of Toensing’s Motion (albeit one could argue her motion was/is improper and not exactly timely) you can’t return something that’s actually already been returned.
Toensing asks the Court to order the Government to return its copy of her cellphone, which was seized in April 2021, and its copy of her iCloud and email accounts subject to the 2019 warrant.
She appears to be objecting, therefore, to the Government’s retaining a copy of this information. Again, however, these materials were obtained pursuant to search warrants, based on probable cause…
As the Court correctly notes - “There is nothing improper or unlawful about the Government’s retention of them” — Toensing’s failure to fully acknowledge the criteria set forth in Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(g) 5 Nor could she make a colorable argument that “the seizure was illegal or the government no longer has a legitimate interest in the property” The fact is Toensing also failed to articulate but more importantly prove both the illegality of the warrants and she was “suffering irreparable harm” that the Government’s lawful retention of evidence they obtained…
And lastly the parties have until June 4, 2021 to submit a list of Special Master candidates ..
“The Government proposes the same procedure here in light of the parallels to this matter…Giuliani and Toensing do not appear to dispute that the appointment of a special master is appropriate….
The special master will expeditiously conduct a filter review of the April 2021 warrant materials for potentially privileged documents, and that review can be informed by Giuliani’s and Toensing’s parallel review of the same materials..The Government’s investigative team will thereafter conduct a responsiveness review of the released materials.”
May 13, 2021 the Order
The next section of this article pertains to the May 13, 2021 Order - in non-legalese the Court ordered the parties to docket redacted letter/motions concerning the warrants, that’s the 2019 and 2021 warrants. via SDNY-ECF https://ecf.nysd.uscourts.gov/doc1/127029093902 or via my public drive
The Order reads in part:
ORDER: The Court has received the letters dated May 12, 2021, by counsel for Rudolph Giuliani and counsel for Victoria Toensing. Those letters shall be filed under seal pending review for any necessary redactions.
The parties are directed to confer promptly regarding the need for any redactions. On or before May 14, 2021, counsel shall (1) file redacted versions of the May 12, 2021 letters directly on the public docket if the parties have agreed on all redactions (or unredacted letters if the parties agree that no redactions are necessary); or (2) submit each party's proposed redactions under seal with a letter explaining the party's position with respect to redactions.
The Government's reply letter shall be submitted under seal on or before May 19, 2021, and filed publicly on or before May 21, 2021, with any necessary redactions.
May 17, 2021 Letter from Giuliani
This is a seventeen page letter (SDNY-ECF https://ecf.nysd.uscourts.gov/doc1/127029111965 or you can pull down a highlighted and annotated copy via my public drive) ) and it actually contains more information…granted his letter is heavy on histrionics and chest pounding but once you skip past that veneer - there are some interesting facts and disclosures - on the whole his seventeen page letter is like throwing an entire Wegmans’ shelf of Alessi pasta at the wall and see what sticks. Particularly problematic of you fail to properly cook the Alessi pasta - well duh nothing sticks
Giuliani attempts to ensnare (former) Sec of State Pompeo by repeatedly stating he was cooperating with the State Department concerning “Hunter Biden’s corrupt Ukraine dealings”
United States Attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania, Scott W. Brady contacted Giuliani and scheduled a face-to-face meeting with him for January 29, 2020 - Giuliani goes on to disclose meeting attendees;
United States Attorney, the First Assistant United States Attorney, the Chief of the Criminal Division, and two additional Assistant United States Attorneys from the Western District of Pennsylvania.
The FBI was represented by the Special Agent in Charge of the Pittsburgh FBI, the Assistant Special Agent in Charge, and three other special agents of the FBI.
Giuliani’s counsel was in contact with the Public Corruption Unit of the SDNY with regard to other matters.
wrote to AUSA Nicolas Roos 6 on Giuliani’s behalf, again offering to answer any questions the Government might have about any subject, crime, past crime, attempted crime or conspiracy. No really see footnote 6 because I generally do not make random assertions that I can’t back up…
Leaks, Leakers, Leaking, Leaks and Leaks and more Leaks (the HPSCI did NOT leak the phone logs Rudy - it was in their December 2019 Report.)
Argues that the Government alone should bear the cost of a Special Master -which is interesting given Giuliani is purportedly broke AF and he has publicly ramped up pressure for Trump to pay for his legal expenses or at the minimum intervene.
Mr.Giuliani also is under a professional obligation to safeguard his clients ’and former clients ’privilege to the maximum extent possible… um okay Mr Notorious Butt Dialer - sure this makes total sense…NYET
Mr. Giuliani has communicated extensively regarding privileged matters with innumerable clients and counsel for, about, and relating to current clients and/or entities that he represents. Serious question; besides Trump who else has hired Giuliani to represent them?
We believe the foregoing facts establish that , there are issues that must first be addressed by the Court before considering the appointment of a Special Master. We respectfully ask the Court to rule on this application before making its decision on the appointment of a Special Master.
What a dingus - Rudy dontcha know that loyalty with Trump is a one-way street…that he’s not coming to rescue you. Bud you and Vic are completely on your own. Also stop with the feigned “attorney client privilege” nonsense - it’s called the crime fraud exemption and Trump is no longer president - so stop referring to him in the present tense as “president” it’s President Biden you intractable ignoramus. How are you still allowed to practice law? No really H-O-W?
May 12, 2021 letter from Toensing
Because yes this bears repeating- it wasn’t just a warrant for Giuliani’s and Toensing’s iCloud - the 2019 included a second warrant for their respective emails. That’s not and opinion—those are the facts and I’m kind of confused by the lack of accuracy. Again I don’t make assertions that I can’t back up with a panoply of documents. Toensing’s May 12 letter to the Court via SDNY-ECF https://ecf.nysd.uscourts.gov/doc1/127029112146 or you can pull down a highlighted and annotated copy from my public drive —I may have been a tad bit snarky starting on page 8 because I had reached the end of my rope with her nutty subterfuge…
For Example: The Covert Warrants related to Ms. Toensing’s electronic data seized from her Google and Apple iCloud accounts:
In re Search Warrant dated Dec. 13, 2019, 19 Mag. 11704 (Google) and
In re Search Warrant dated Nov. 4, 2019, 19 Mag. 10364 (Apple iCloud).
Because Vic is out there amplifying Trump’s Big Lie and it’s an affront to our Democracy and centuries old “peaceful transfer of power” -
given her “hubby” said on National TV that former CISA Director should be “shot and quartered” because how dare Krebs tell the truth about the 2020 General Election and how secure it was. So spare me the feigned indignation that I’m being hard on the Trump-Lawyer-Clown Parade…
As instructed by the Court on May 13, 2021 (SDNY-ECF Doc No 11 https://ecf.nysd.uscourts.gov/doc1/127129093902) the Government filed a redacted copy of their 5 page April 29, 2021 Letter to the public docket (SDNY-ECF Doc No 16 https://ecf.nysd.uscourts.gov/doc1/127023061078 or a highlighted and annotated copy can be found on my public drive) on May 20, 2021… what is it that I typically say about Court Documents? Yes always read the footnotes because in my industry we know that’s where the “good stuff” can be found. For Example Footnote # 3
…November 4, 2019, this Court issued a search warrant for iCloud accounts belonging to Giuliani and Toensing for the time period [redacted]… (as to Giuliani) and […heavily redacted…] and (as to Toensing).
SDNY -USA Letter Re Warrants Page 3 Doc # 16
On December 13, 2019, this Court issued a search warrant for an email account belonging to Toensing for the time period [redacted] …These prior warrants remain under seal, although pursuant to the Court’s limited unsealing order, the Government has provided copies of the warrants, but not the applications, to counsel for Giuliani and Toensing
Search Warrant dated April 21, 2021, 21-Mag-4335 Search Warrant dated November 4, 2019, 19 Mag. 10364 (iCloud) -that’s the infamous iCloud search warrant that Giuliani falsely claimed in 2021 the FBI “illegally accessed my iCloud” - Victoria Toensing Search & Seizure Warrant:MJ-Case No: 21-mj-004591……on April 28, 2021, a Court issued a warrant to search an electronic device belonging to Victoria Toensing (21 Mag. 4591), which had been seized pursuant to a warrant previously issued by a judge of the District of Maryland.
Summary via Government’s Memorandum of Support of a Special Master:
Again if you take the time to read the Court filings versus listening to the QANON-for-the-Left conspiracy theories - the facts are there. And perhaps I’m boring but facts do not need to be over hyped or dramatized because doing so actually cheapens the true value of the facts. And the notion that the Government is suddenly looking into Giuliani and Toensing “acting as foreign agents” that’s not at all accurate and I can actually prove it because if you read the May 20, 2021;
The warrants arose out of an ongoing grand jury investigation, during the course of which, in 2019, the Government also sought and obtained from this Court warrants to search the contents of iCloud and email accounts belonging to Giuliani and Toensing.
Government believes it is appropriate here based on the unique circumstances of this investigation and the very public nature of the searches at issue, in order to ensure that the privilege review process is both fair and has the appearance of fairness.
Giuliani and Toensing are not above the law or immune to criminal investigation(s)
The one thing I don’t understand is why there is minimal reporting about the “associates of Giuliani Partners” - meaning the FBI seized eighteen electronic devices from Giuliani’s and “employees of Giuliani Partners”
they are entitled to the extraordinary and unprecedented remedy of converting lawfully-issued search warrants into subpoenas, so that they can review their own materials and decide what the Government gets to see. That is not the law, and their requests otherwise should be denied.
…remaining requests made by Giuliani and Toensing are either meritless, contrary to law, or at best premature, and should be denied. Giuliani is not entitled to the unsealing of the affidavits supporting the warrants, a request that is unsupported by the case law…
Rudy give the FBI the Passcodes:
Also of note as of May 20, 2021 the FBI has successfully imaged/downloaded eleven of the eighteen devices seized. The SDNY-USAO informed Giuliani that the remaining seven are password protected… so maybe reporters should ask Rudy why he’s obstructing the investigation by refusing to prove the passcodes? Just a thought, not a sermon
…cannot be fully accessed without a passcode, and as such the Government has advised Giuliani’s counsel that the devices can be returned expeditiously if Giuliani were to provide the passcode;
…otherwise, the Government does not have a timeline for when those devices may be returned because the FBI will be attempting to access those devices without a passcode, which may take time.
…multi-year grand jury investigation into conduct involving Giuliani, Toensing, and others…
Yup you read the correctly and frankly I found it delicious.. the “and others”
The 2019 Warrants werealso supported by detailed affidavits and issued based on probable cause findings that Giuliani’s and Toensing’s accounts would contain evidence of specified crimes.
Finally, each of the warrants included the following provision because Giuliani and Toensing are attorneys…
I think for now you are sufficiently caught up - with the facts surrounding these search warrants. Again I am mindful that ECF can be super expensive and I know there are a lot of documents discussed in this article - to make it easier for you -on my public drive I created a folder Giuliani and Toensing Warrants, found here and there’s a sub-folder entitled 2018 Cohen S&SW SDNY, found here.
Not to belabor the point but you need to stop listening and amplifying the QANON-for-the-Left insane conspiracies being trafficked on social media. These folks are messing with your heads. They rarely (if ever) provide you links to Original Documents. Whereas I like to provide my readers/followers with unfettered access to Court Filings. Because those filings contain a lot of facts and facts do not need to be overly dramatized for “likes or retweets” …and for now I’m going to genuinely enjoy the Memorial Day Weekend with my Family and Friends.
In the Matter of Search Warrants Executed on April 9, 2018 (1:18-mj-03161) https://ecf.nysd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?491942 - April 27, 2018 Order Appointment of a Special Master https://ecf.nysd.uscourts.gov/doc1/127022333074 - furthermore in an effort to save my readers/followers additional cost -I pulled down 9+ court filings in the 2018 SDNY-M Cohen Search & Seizure Warrants and created a sub folder, found here (the MCohen folder is within the Giuliani Toening folder, found here)
Attorney Client Privilege - many falsely assume privilege is “absolute” —In my industry we say “Oh FFS don’t peirce the veil” or “come on stop watching Law and Order…” this privilege can be exempt and it’s called crime-fraud Fed. R. Evid. 501
communicates with a (retained) attorney for legal advice.
attorney is acting in a professional capacity
the client intended for communications to be private
Meaning you can’t randomly “cc” an attorney and later claim privilege, particularly if you haven’t executed a L.O.E. Or paid a retainer fee, which is typical if there’s a signed L.O.E. Also
At the heart of the Crime-Fraud Exemption: upon information and belief —allegations that a client may have sought legal advice, which was later used in furtherance of an illegal or fraudulent activity.
suborning perjury (asking an attorney or a witness to provide testimony that’s known to be false.
Footnote 1, page 1 - May 28, 2021 Order Granting Government’s motion/request for a Special Master “…Court finds that oral argument is unnecessary to resolve these issues, Toensing’s request for oral argument (Dkt. No. 19) is denied…”
Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(g) for the return of property seized in a criminal case is filed, it shall be assigned for all further proceedings to the judge to whom the underlying case was assigned. The judge may either act on the motion without responsive papers or advise the United States attorney of the date(s) when responsive papers are due. Rule 41(g) motions that are filed after the related criminal case is closed, shall be opened as a new civil action, and all filings shall be docketed therein. SDNY Local Rules (2018) -last visited May 28, 2021 (see page 111) https://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/local_rules/rules-2018-10-29.pdf
Remember this name because what Giuliani is attempting to do is establish a predicate that Roos needs to recuse - trust me on that - you’ll see why. Look at the signatory of the various letters the Government filed…
Just amazing! We learn so much from you. I cannot tell you how much I appreciate you sharing all that you do! You make us aware and so much smarter! Thank you!
Just amazing! We learn so much from you. I cannot tell you how much I appreciate you sharing all that you do! You make us aware and so much smarter! Thank you!
Gotta re-re-read this one, Filey. Patriotism can be exhausting, but thanks for giving us the maps.