They really can't think people are THAT dumb.
Right?
Hendon proposed yet another level of protections, in which Cohen’s lawyers, after finishing their initial review, would then be required to “identify to the president all seized materials that relate to him in any way and provide a copy of those materials to him and his counsel.”
Trump, or his lawyers, would then get to say what he believed to be off-limits to investigators.
The chances of this happening are less than zero, but it's seriously absurd that Trump's lawyers would even fucking humor the notion that he would be able to review and withhold evidence at will.
Heheh, wow. They really are panicking now, aren't they? At this rate, I half expect an outburst along the lines of "ENOUGH! I AM YOUR KING!" by the end of the week.
Holy shit, they are immensely desperate.
Cmmitted a murder and left the murder weapon at the scen with your name on it and your prints? Just tell them they cant use it as evidence. Got an eye witness who saw you committing the murder? Remover them too. Got an confessions of the murder with your signature on it? Nope, remove it.
The very idea that a lawyer thinks he can pick and choose which evidence the prosecutor can use is the dumbest thing ive heard.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/962348831789797381
Another in the long series "A tweet for everything"
Trump: "Is there no such thing any longer as due process?"
Also Trump: "I get to unilaterally say "nuh-uh" to all evidence you wanna bring against me in court"
At this point I'm mostly offended by how stupid this entire administration seems to think everyone else is.
Well to be honest, if you don't count all the incriminating evidence, the president is actually squeaky clean.
I don't like the feeling that there is the potential for breach of attorney client privilege, but I'm sure the judge who signed the warrant didn't sign it lightly knowing the implications of the warrant and the spotlight they would be under.
As has been said millions of times, attorney-client privilege no longer exists where the lawyer and client are both being investigated for collaborative criminal activity.
They're desperate as all hell and are looking for some kind of out with how badly things are going for them. I could almost guarantee that the defense will have an utterly insane request like this for every step of the process.
Couple of points:
1) According to investigators, Cohen was doing effectively zero actual work as a lawyer, and had made several contradictory statements about whether or not he was actually representing Trump as an attorney as opposed to a friend -- IE he claimed that he wasn't acting as an attorney when he made the likely illegal payment to Stormy Daniels in violation of federal campaign laws. Thus, Attorney-Client privelege is moot because Cohen wasn't acting as Trump's attorney by his own, and Trump's, admission.
2) Attorney-Client Privilege does not apply if the attorney is an active accomplice, witness, or participant in his clients' illegal activities. Trump and Cohen go back decades, and many of the crimes Cohen was raided for are tied explicitly to Trump as well. Thus, Attorney-Client privilege is moot, because being a lawyer isn't a free pass to commit crimes, and evidence seized in relation to those crimes is under zero obligation to give a free pass to those implicated in those crimes no matter what the relationship.
3) This is far from the from the first time that attorney-client privilege has been "breached" in this way. Though not exactly commonplace, there is plenty of established precedent for this ruling. Paul Manafort's lawyer, for example, was compelled to testify against him under court order after it was revealed that she had knowingly prepared, presented, and was witness to, a fraudulent document signed by Manafort and Gates.
4) In spite of all that: the burden of evidence required for such an order to be granted is exceptionally high. If a judge approved such a "breach," you can feel pretty darn confident that the prosecutors presented something exceptionally compelling.
So, in a nutshell: if you don't want attorney-client privilege to be waived, don't commit crimes with your attorney.
With how little he respects the intelligence of the nation and his "I could shoot someone and get away with it" attitude, this seems like a GREAT idea. No way in hell that he'd get the evidence, call for an emergency state of the union broadcast, EAT said evidence on live television, then despite the whole country seeing it happen live claim that there was never any evidence after all, WITCH HUNT!1.
Gotta love how he thinks President = Above The Law. No fucking way in hell would be actually review anything. And odds are what he would be given would "disappear" or "strangely have never arrived".
I'm not saying that it's not warranted. It just always makes me uncomfortable, even when it's warranted. I understand that it's warranted in this case, and I'm confident that the judge didn't mess up one bit. Doesn't change that it still makes me uncomfortable.
This is it, we’re really close now. If he wants to hide this information so much it must be damning evidence.
but why would he want to review and withhold evidence if he did nothing wrong hmmmmmm
I wish I could've seen the judge's reaction to such a ridiculous request.
"Alright, where are the hidden cameras? Come on, Ashton Kutcher. You can jump out now."
You know what would be even more uncomfortable? Client-attorney privilege being unbreakable. Any criminal organization worth their salt would have an in-house attorney do their bidding so when the cops inevitably take down some of their members, the most incriminating evidence is safely tucked away at their attorney's office.
This is your daily reminder that Trump has convinced himself, or at least as publicly espoused the theory, that client-attorney privilege covers absolutely everything spoken in the presence of one of the conversation participants' attorneys. If Trump and Don Jr. talked about rigging the election while Cohen was sitting next to them, Trump believes that should be privileged.
Look forward to even more raging against the rule of law because it's making him scared and uncomfortable and it's unfair to be mean to him when he finds out that legal theory is worth less than a Trump University diploma.
when an "attorney" has three clients in the past year
they're starting to use the idea of attorney more as a legal shield than providing legal advice to their client
https://twitter.com/MichaelAvenatti/status/985883544944893953
Watergate any% -200 IQ run at WR pace
They're arguing this out in court right now, Erica Orden from the WSJ is livetweeting it
https://twitter.com/eorden/status/985968010837090304
I just caught that one of Cohen's three clients is Sean Hannity. I would pop the biggest satisfaction boner of my life if Hannity were to actually face charges.
The hell is going on with the image in that article?
https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/249570/883859a4-da34-408b-92fc-46d39e3f9b6d/image.png
its a video, not an image.
For some reason it's a jpeg of 10 quality according to the url.
Article's image:
https://media.gannett-cdn.com/29906170001/29906170001_5767208863001_5767202230001-vs.jpg?pubId=29906170001
Full quality version:
https://media.gannett-cdn.com/29906170001/29906170001_5767208863001_5767202230001-vs.jpg?pubId=29906170001
Would've just linked these rather than embedding them but wysiwyg editors are utter trash and it eats the part of the url controlling the image quality.
Probably has to do with preventing referral garbage
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
