Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And the request was as absurd then as it is today. These guys should have been pushing for a special master from the get-go if they wanted to get the emails out of the hands of the taint team. Instead, they pushed for Cohen/Trump's team to personally review it and then had to walk it back to asking for a special master, completely undermining their credibility in the process.
Just another example of the prez's attorneys doing his bidding
I am sure they are capable of knowing thst was a stupid request that would fail
But it bought them time
Delayed the FBi access
But it did make them look stupid
But hey--Trump's reelection campaign paid each one of them $600 an hr plus associates' time to work that claim
What do they care
Everyone has a 5th amendment. Or is that now also gone?
If you want to assert A/C privilege, you have to identify your client. That's how the privilege is asserted. This has literally nothing to do with the 5th Amendment. You are way off base, as usual.
Everyone has a 5th amendment. Or is that now also gone?
That only applies in court
If the warrant is lawfully based on presumption of illegal activity then the FBI or police can search for any evidence that proves you committed a crime
How do you think info against Al Capone or the Russian spy Rudolph Able was discovered
5th amendment only applies in court or deposition under oath
By saying the FBI is Trump's personal agent you follow the same illogic that Trump used trying to suborn Comey re Flynn
The FBI, the DoJ, the SDNY all work for the PEOPLE of the US
Not Trump
Not even "a president"
I did not say I endorse Trump's use of the FBI as a personal agent. I wrote: Trump's lawyers are asking the judge to block his own FBI from seeing much of this evidence... gee, isn't that obstruction?
The FBI is within the executive branch and that makes the FBI "his." While there has traditionally been a "wall" separating the White House from the FBI to maintain independence and impartiality, we know Trump has no respect for any institution nor their traditions. I agree with you it's wrong for Trump to ignore that traditional boundary. But Trump will try to do what he wants. Some legal scholars say Trump could bypass Sessions and Rosenstein and fire Mueller directly and there's nothing that can be done to stop it because Mueller is in the executive branch and Trump is the chief executive, tradition be damned.
I did not say I endorse Trump's use of the FBI as a personal agent. I wrote: Trump's lawyers are asking the judge to block his own FBI from seeing much of this evidence... gee, isn't that obstruction?
The FBI is within the executive branch and that makes the FBI "his." While there has traditionally been a "wall" separating the White House from the FBI to maintain independence and impartiality, we know Trump has no respect for any institution nor their traditions. I agree with you it's wrong for Trump to ignore that traditional boundary. But Trump will try to do what he wants. Some legal scholars say Trump could bypass Sessions and Rosenstein and fire Mueller directly and there's nothing that can be done to stop it because Mueller is in the executive branch and Trump is the chief executive, tradition be damned.
Sorry if I overreacted
But using "his" implied Trump is correct in thinking he can use the DoJ as his personal protection legal team
Comey's best day in the FBI was when he stopped the WH from taking advantage of AG A.s.h.c..r.o.f.t. in the hospital...(and why I had to spell that name that way to avoid having it starred out I have no clue)...
So the WH in the past hasn't been above trying to do something similar--
And you are right--the fact that Trump tried to obtain the right to be the "special master" to choose what was and was not protected under attorney client priviledge was a veiled threat of obstruction
But it is one that almost any client in similar circumstances would like to try===they just aren't POTUS
Does that mean identifying the third client would incriminate him? If so, he can't claim AC privilege.
Not incriminate (supposedly) but naming the client would likely point to the type of work done--which could be infringement of the attorney-client priviledge
Like if it was Don Jr. People would assume (probably very correctly) it had to do with a possible O'Day NDA/settlement
Since Cohen supposedly blocked early story about their affair couple of years ago...
Or if it were a Russian mobster people would jump to money laundering
Maybe Jared Kushner--in that case maybe not an NDA but money laundering...
Maybe a Trump charity--he sits on the boards--
What about Paul Ryan???
You know it won't be someone like Preet Bharara...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
