- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Can we do a quick review of attorney-client privilege
Posted on 2/27/19 at 6:12 am
Posted on 2/27/19 at 6:12 am
In relation to Trump and Cohen. I’m confused. I thought communications made to or by and an attorney for the purpose of obtaining or giving legal advice were privileged. And the exception to that is if the attorney and client are planning or engaging in fraud or a crime.
Seems like some of these statements Cohen is making are revealing privileged communications.
Beyond that, he is way more disloyal to Trump than I have ever seen any other lawyer be to a former client.
Seems like some of these statements Cohen is making are revealing privileged communications.
Beyond that, he is way more disloyal to Trump than I have ever seen any other lawyer be to a former client.
9
Posted on 2/27/19 at 6:15 am to baybeefeetz
quote:
Seems like some of these statements Cohen is making are revealing privileged communications.
They are claiming that the Stormy payments are somehow a crime.
Posted on 2/27/19 at 6:17 am to baybeefeetz
quote:
And the exception to that is if the attorney and client are planning or engaging in fraud or a crime.
He is trying to spin it as this, even though it’s a massive stretch.
quote:
Beyond that, he is way more disloyal to Trump than I have ever seen any other lawyer be to a former client.
He’s most certainly being paid to do so. It’s not a coincidence that he switched back to democrat after his falling out with Trump
Posted on 2/27/19 at 6:17 am to Revelator
Okay that’s one statement. What about the others? Maybe I’m wrong.
Posted on 2/27/19 at 6:18 am to baybeefeetz
Being that Cohen was disbarred yesterday, I’m not sure he really cares. His only viable source of income from here on out is as an anti-Trump personality.
Decent debate on whether the privileged statements can be used against Trump, though. But I don’t expect much that is legally actionable anyway.
Decent debate on whether the privileged statements can be used against Trump, though. But I don’t expect much that is legally actionable anyway.
Posted on 2/27/19 at 6:19 am to boosiebadazz
Good post.
Posted on 2/27/19 at 6:19 am to boosiebadazz
quote:
His only viable source of income from here on out is as an anti-Trump personality.
Which means he'll say whatever they want him to.
Posted on 2/27/19 at 6:20 am to The Pirate King
What are the repercussions of him violating the attorney/client privilege now that he has been disbarred? Never really thought about it- could that have something to do with the timing of yesterday's announcement?
Posted on 2/27/19 at 6:22 am to boosiebadazz
quote:
Decent debate on whether the privileged statements can be used against Trump, though.
Much like when a jury is told to "disregard that evidence/statement/testimony/whatever". When it gets out, many in the public will use it to form opinions. And that's exactly what they want to happen.
This post was edited on 2/27/19 at 6:23 am
Posted on 2/27/19 at 6:26 am to PhDoogan
As boosie said, there are none. Trump could sue him, but that's probably a waste of time and money.
Posted on 2/27/19 at 6:50 am to PhDoogan
quote:
What are the repercussions of him violating the attorney/client privilege now that he has been disbarred?
None
The only punishment an attorney could ever receive for revealing privilege info was disbarment.
This is why you shouldn't even trust your own attorney.
Keep all your secrets to yourself
Posted on 2/27/19 at 6:54 am to baybeefeetz
But if Trump did not do the things Cohen is saying, then it would seem Cohen isn’t violating any privileged information. So as long as Cohen just keeps lying, he won’t be violating attorney client privilege.
I’m a doctor, not a lawyer, though
I’m a doctor, not a lawyer, though
Posted on 2/27/19 at 6:56 am to Loserman
quote:
None
This is why you shouldn't even trust your own attorney.
You may be right- possibly there could be a species of malpractice/tort damage claim that could be brought against an already disbarred attorney, but that is irrelevant in this case. The sad thing is that the SDNY's squeeze of Cohen has exactly the effect of which you warn.
Posted on 2/27/19 at 6:57 am to baybeefeetz
I'm pretty sure he's already been disbarred. After that it's up to the client to sue. And he pretty much has nothing. He might write a book or get a go fund me, other than that the guy is destitute. Any of those proceeds would be attachable.
This post was edited on 2/27/19 at 6:59 am
Posted on 2/27/19 at 7:01 am to Loserman
One of the things they are trying to prove is obstruction. Its not the fact that he paid stormy, they are saying he paid her to keep her from publicly speaking about it AND OBSTRUCTING THE CAMPAIGN.
The funny thing is, to prove this, they have to prove he never paid someone in the past to shut them up. Good luck with that one.
Nothing should surprise us at this point. I fully expect him on tape referring to a black person and you hear him refer to him as a Ni...... A month from now you will hear the full tape transcript and what he referred to was Nigerian. Dont laugh, it would not be as bizarre as some of the things we have already seen.
The funny thing is, to prove this, they have to prove he never paid someone in the past to shut them up. Good luck with that one.
Nothing should surprise us at this point. I fully expect him on tape referring to a black person and you hear him refer to him as a Ni...... A month from now you will hear the full tape transcript and what he referred to was Nigerian. Dont laugh, it would not be as bizarre as some of the things we have already seen.
Posted on 2/27/19 at 7:19 am to trinidadtiger
quote:
OBSTRUCTING THE CAMPAIGN.
The frick is this? Lol
Posted on 2/27/19 at 7:52 am to boosiebadazz
There’s no action he could take against Cohen. But the privilege belongs to the client not the lawyer.
I don’t understand why an injunction has not been sought or issued preventing him from
testifying.
A lawyer is not allowed to testify about a client or a former client without a court order, even down to circumstances relating to why the lawyer was terminated.
To me it is absurd beyond belief that he is testifying about anything.
I guess maybe Stormy payments. But as a lawyer this makes me extremely uncomfortable.
I don’t understand why an injunction has not been sought or issued preventing him from
testifying.
A lawyer is not allowed to testify about a client or a former client without a court order, even down to circumstances relating to why the lawyer was terminated.
To me it is absurd beyond belief that he is testifying about anything.
I guess maybe Stormy payments. But as a lawyer this makes me extremely uncomfortable.
Posted on 2/27/19 at 7:54 am to baybeefeetz
Hes been disbarred so, what else should they do?
Posted on 2/27/19 at 8:01 am to baybeefeetz
I just find it ironic that when the Reps were in the majority on these committees the Dems were all about transparency and no closed door meetings but now that the Dems are in control - here we are in a closed door meeting.
Posted on 2/27/19 at 8:04 am to baybeefeetz
It is privileged.
Trump should have a lawyer there asserting it.
However, the guy has been disbarred and is going to jail, so there's no real sanction.
Trump should have a lawyer there asserting it.
However, the guy has been disbarred and is going to jail, so there's no real sanction.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News