dagblog - Comments for "What WSJ knew &amp; when: Avenatti dumps" http://dagblog.com/politics/what-wsj-knew-when-avenatti-dumps-25265 Comments for "What WSJ knew & when: Avenatti dumps" en This was my read, too, http://dagblog.com/comment/253196#comment-253196 <a id="comment-253196"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/253161#comment-253161">I did not read Wood&#039;s</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>This was my read, too, influenced by TPM who reported that the comment about the "publicity tour" was not pejorative.  It was more a warning: "If your goal is to have standing in these proceedings, you're going to have to tone it down going forward or we'll never find an untainted jury."</p> </div></div></div> Thu, 31 May 2018 13:29:42 +0000 Michael Maiello comment 253196 at http://dagblog.com I did not read Wood's http://dagblog.com/comment/253161#comment-253161 <a id="comment-253161"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/253159#comment-253159">Turns out Judge Wood was not</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>I did not read Wood's response to Avenatti as a "dressing down." She told him to pick a lane. He did.</p> <p>I am not sure Klasfeld has framed the timing of the taint team correctly. The Special Master did not replace their function, just put an intermediary process in place before their work began. Wood only put in the Special Master to satisfy other parties. She did not rule it was necessary on the basis of evidence presented initially. The prosecutors still need to have all evidence go through the "taint" review process before seeing it themselves.</p> </div></div></div> Thu, 31 May 2018 00:42:37 +0000 moat comment 253161 at http://dagblog.com Turns out Judge Wood was not http://dagblog.com/comment/253159#comment-253159 <a id="comment-253159"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/253147#comment-253147">Uh oh, Avenatti gets lecture</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Turns out Judge Wood was not happy with the other side either:</p> <p> </p><div class="media_embed"> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en" height="" width=""> <p dir="ltr" lang="en" xml:lang="en">There's a good point that the big dressing down that Avenatti got - resulting in his withdrawal - overshadowed the riot act that Judge Wood also read to Team Cohen on the speed of their review, threatening to send it back to the taint team. ⬇️<br /><br /> More coming in the next update. <a href="https://t.co/vX1AvoNeF9">https://t.co/vX1AvoNeF9</a></p> — Adam Klasfeld (@KlasfeldReports) <a href="https://twitter.com/KlasfeldReports/status/1001917877962801152?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 30, 2018</a></blockquote> <script async="" charset="utf-8" height="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" width=""></script></div> <p> </p> </div></div></div> Wed, 30 May 2018 23:31:16 +0000 artappraiser comment 253159 at http://dagblog.com Uh oh, Avenatti gets lecture http://dagblog.com/comment/253147#comment-253147 <a id="comment-253147"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/politics/what-wsj-knew-when-avenatti-dumps-25265">What WSJ knew &amp; when: Avenatti dumps</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Uh oh, Avenatti gets lecture on proper officer-of-the-court behavior from Judge Kimba Wood:</p> <p><a href="https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/30/politics/avenatti-cohen-publicity-tour/index.html">Avenatti drops request to participate in Cohen case after warning to 'stop your publicity tour'</a></p> <p>By Kara Scannell @ CNN.com, May 31 @ 3:31 pm</p> <blockquote> <p>Porn star Stormy Daniels' attorney, Michael Avenatti, withdrew his motion to participate in the court battle involving the FBI raid of President Donald Trump's attorney's hotel and office Wednesday after a federal judge warned him he would have to "stop your publicity tour."</p> <p>Avenatti, who practices law in California, had requested to be admitted into the New York proceedings, but was met with fierce objection from the attorney for Michael Cohen, Trump's long-time lawyer, who cited Avenatti's frequent television appearances, public statements about Cohen's guilt and his release of Cohen's personal financial information.</p> <p>In a nod to that, Judge Kimba Wood told Avenatti that for him to be admitted, "you would have to change your conduct" and "stop your publicity tour." Wood said she didn't mean that in a derogatory way but later said "this conduct is inimitable to giving Mr. Cohen eventually a fair trial."</p> <p>Wood did not rule on whether to allow Avenatti to appear formally in court but made clear that his time speaking before her was limited. "Until you are admitted I don't expect you to stand here and be heard," the judge told him. About an hour after the hearing ended Avenatti withdrew his motion to appear without prejudice, meaning he could take it up later [....]</p> </blockquote> </div></div></div> Wed, 30 May 2018 19:56:08 +0000 artappraiser comment 253147 at http://dagblog.com Yeah... you're generally not http://dagblog.com/comment/253137#comment-253137 <a id="comment-253137"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/politics/what-wsj-knew-when-avenatti-dumps-25265">What WSJ knew &amp; when: Avenatti dumps</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Yeah... you're generally not supposed to let your reporting become a source for the rumors you're reporting, so I figure the guy has his reasons.</p> </div></div></div> Wed, 30 May 2018 17:58:26 +0000 Michael Maiello comment 253137 at http://dagblog.com