Client privilege. too broadly, declined to answer questions from prosecutors, sources say howl in her sealed ruling determined that prosecutors were able to show corcoran s legal services were used in furtherance of a crime. the justice department is still seeking corcoran s testimony after he cited attorney client privilege as well as testimony from another trump lawyer, jennifer little, cnn has learned. trump s lawyers have sought emergency intervention from the appeals court three judges from the d c circuit court of appeals have moved very quickly to respond as they re still considering whether they put the decision from howell on hold. evan perez, cnn washington . now to a cnn exclusive. stormy daniels attorney says communications between his client and a trump lawyer has been turned over to the manhattan district attorney. the exchanges raised the possibility that trump s counsel joe
Justice department is still seeking corcoran s testimony after he cited attorney client privilege as well as testimony from another trump lawyer, jennifer little, cnn has learned. trump s lawyers have sought emergency intervention from the appeals court three judges from the d c circuit court of appeals have moved very quickly to respond as they re still considering whether they put the decision from howell on hold. evan perez, cnn washington . now to a cnn exclusive. stormy daniels attorney says communications between his client and trump lawyer had been turned over to the manhattan district attorney. the exchanges raised the possibility that trump s counsel joe tacopina, may be sidelined from the case. second piano denies any confidential information was shared with his office district attorney is investigating trump s alleged hush money payment to daniel s just before the 2016 election. an indictment on charges of falsifying business records is expected any day now. wall street in g
According to a unanimous ruling from the dc circuit court of appeals, a three-judge panel, robert mueller turned his n-his report to the justice department, attorney general bill barr and the justice department never actually considered at all whether or not trumpid committed crimes or whether trump should be charged. they literally never even looked at that possibility despite what they said they were doing publicly. barr lied and told congress and the public that the justice department did consider that and after that careful consideration they definitely concluded trump committed no crimes and shouldn t be charged but the appeals court says that barr lied about it. this is from a, again, a unanimous three judge ruling from the federal appeals court in washington, d.c. quote, the department s submissions indicated that the memorandum conveyed advice about whether to charge president trump with a crime. but the courts in camera review of that memorandum revealed that
First time she s faced congress. she s actually faced congress three times before this for several jobs, including the u.s. sentencing commission, the dc district court, and the dc circuit court of appeals. we expect republicans to go tough on her for allegations they ve been floating that she has been soft on crime, and the republican strategy is expected to be twofold. questions about jackson s experience as a judge, public defender, time spent on a federal commission that ultimately slashed drug sentences and they also plan to pivot to questioning her on the biden administration policies. but i do want to note most recently she faced congress and was confirmed to the dc district excuse me, the dc circuit court of appeals in 2021, and she actually won the support from three republicans. those republicans being senators susan collins, lindsey graham and lisa murkowski, and even
Testimony could provide new evidence that may be essential at a senate impeachment trial as well as lead to new articles of impeachment. the dc circuit court of appeals is scheduled to hear arguments on january 3rd on whether it will force the subpoena. what is the likelihood, you think, that, a, the courts are going to wade into this conversation about mcgahn testimony and what would the implications be if he is, in fact, required to provide testimony to the ongoing impeachment conversation? well, i think it s a matter of how far into the election year house democrats want to pursue the impeachment topic. it may very well be justified and warranted given some recent information and information that may come to light through additional testimony or court decisions that at least allow for testimony. and then there might be a fight over executive privilege. you know, i think democrats have to decide whether or not they