Legal experts pan Trump lawyers' Friday night do-over motion against Mar-a-Lago search
Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani taking a photo of the audience while on stage at a political event. Photo by Gage Skidmore.

Donald Trump's attorneys filed an 11-page Friday night motion after Judge Aileen Cannon made them restructure their filing for a special master to oversee the documents recovered when the FBI executed a search warrant at Mar-a-Lago.

"The filing, which was billed as a 'supplement' to Trump’s meandering initial bid on Monday, was notable, however, for what it didn’t include," Politico reported. "It makes no mention of the hundreds of pages of classified documents recovered during the Aug. 8 search and in previous visits by investigators. It also makes no mention of Trump’s claims to have declassified the material. It also eschews the heated criticism Trump has leveled at Bruce Reinhart, the magistrate judge who authorized the search."

The motion was signed by attorneys Lindsey Halligan, Jim Trusty, and Evan Corcoran.

Former Deputy Assistant Attorney General Harry Litman said, "Well at least they signed this one."

Other legal experts were similarly unimpressed.

Appellate attorney Ted Boutrous said the filing was, "very weak, very moot."

MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin noted Trump's lawyer's cited an interesting case without naming the subject.

"The case Trump’s lawyers cite as precedent for appointing a special master is . . . SDNY’s investigation of his former lawyer, Rudy Giuliani," Rubin noted. "It makes sense that privileged material would be found on Rudy’s seized devices. Not comparable to Trump. At all. (That would be 21-mc-00425, SDNY, which Trump’s brief does not acknowledge is about Rudy.)"

Attorney Bradley Moss said, "Still no Motion for Preliminary Injunction. No sworn affidavit. This was better written in form but not really substance."

Former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti wrote, "The crux of this motion—a request for a special master to keep materials subject to executive privilege away from the Executive Branch—remains nonsensical. And even if this motion is granted, it doesn’t move the ball forward for Trump."

ALSO IN THE NEWS: Leaked video confirms disturbing history of Amy Coney Barrett’s faith sect: ‘Women were always crying’