The attorney who represented former President Donald Trump at his second impeachment trial spoke out regarding claims the federal government is potentially violating the real estate mogul’s rights.
David Schoen told “Life, Liberty & Levin” that, among other things, he is concerned about pressure being put on the Trump-appointed federal judge randomly selected to hear the case.
Judge Aileen Cannon of the Southern District of Florida was tapped by Trump in 2017 to replace George W. Bush-appointed Judge Kenneth Marra after he assumed senior status.
Host Mark Levin began by claiming “an endless pattern of leaks” are negatively affecting Trump’s case.
BARR DISMISSES ‘FARCICAL’ TRUMP PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS DEFENSE
“It’s a very dangerous situation that we face with these kinds of leaks,” Schoen said.
“You emphasized the right of a defendant to a public trial — we all should believe in that, but we can’t have selective leaking.”
“In the case in Florida, for example, the government has filed — and the court approved — an unopposed protective order that limits the information the public can have extraordinarily, but also limits even the defendant’s access to information limited to only looking at documents — non-classified documents — in front of his lawyers.”
Levin agreed with Schoen’s characterization, saying the defendant’s team should be demanding they be given equal access to such material ahead of what will be a public trial.
Schoen said he respects Trump’s current attorney in the case, Chris Kise, an ally of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis who was appointed to the state solicitor general’s office by former Gov. Charlie Crist in 2002.
LEVIN: IF RELEVANT LAW APPLIED TO TRUMP, ‘BILL CLINTON WOULD BE DOING 50 YEARS WITH HIS WIFE’
However, Schoen said it is important that Trump add additional criminal defense attorneys “who are prepared to fight.”
He expressed concern that Cannon will face continued media scrutiny for being a “Trump appointee” hearing a case involving Trump as a defendant.
Schoen said Cannon’s critics are largely hypocritical because there is less concern about commentary from the bench when it involves high-profile liberal federal judges like the Obama-appointed Amy Berman Jackson or Amit Mehta in Washington, D.C.
Jackson was notably the judge in the “Clinton socks” case cited by Trump in defense of his classified documents controversy, while Mehta has heard numerous cases involving right-leaning January 6 Capitol riot defendants.
“We don’t hear much about the judges in D.C.… who make all sorts of extraneous, unnecessary comments maligning former President Trump,” he said.
“We don’t hear about who appointed them… and how those comments… affect jury pools directly. It’s very dangerous.”
