- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
re: Going forward, how can there be effective criminal representation......
Posted on 4/11/18 at 6:37 pm to rbWarEagle
Posted on 4/11/18 at 6:37 pm to rbWarEagle
Yep. I’ve been skeptical of the actions in this case, but this isn’t something entirely knew. Your privileged communications, to the extent they are used to facilitate criminal activity, are no longer really privileged in that sense.
This isn’t the first lawyers office that has been raided, and it’s won’t be the last. It’s hasnt had a chilling effect on the HONEST practice of law or the privilege.
Any judge worth their salt (and to be frank, whether you consider them loons or not, most federal judges are), are going to look really, really skeptically at anwarrant demanding this course of action. I bet the review was ten times more careful in this case, and likely have even included the judge asking advice from other judges concerning the request.
No warrant in something like this would be granted lightly.
This isn’t the first lawyers office that has been raided, and it’s won’t be the last. It’s hasnt had a chilling effect on the HONEST practice of law or the privilege.
Any judge worth their salt (and to be frank, whether you consider them loons or not, most federal judges are), are going to look really, really skeptically at anwarrant demanding this course of action. I bet the review was ten times more careful in this case, and likely have even included the judge asking advice from other judges concerning the request.
No warrant in something like this would be granted lightly.
3
Posted on 4/11/18 at 6:39 pm to Scoop
quote:
Not enough talk is going on about how crazy serious this is.
I suspect its always been this way. Trump is just shining a light on it.
Posted on 4/11/18 at 6:39 pm to Scoop
Hypothetical. I tell my attorney that I have a box of meth in a storage unit that I need for him to make disappear and he tells me no problem and then that meth gets thrown in a lake.
Is this conversation covered under attorney/client privilege?
Of course not.
Is this conversation covered under attorney/client privilege?
Of course not.
Posted on 4/11/18 at 6:40 pm to SCLibertarian
Truth.
That’s why I call them Democrats, Leftists or Progressives and I refuse to call them Liberals.
There is nothing liberal about thinking the cops should be able to read your lawyer’s email. Even if it’s a “clean team” of cops reading your email. It’s still the cops reading your email.
That’s why I call them Democrats, Leftists or Progressives and I refuse to call them Liberals.
There is nothing liberal about thinking the cops should be able to read your lawyer’s email. Even if it’s a “clean team” of cops reading your email. It’s still the cops reading your email.
Posted on 4/11/18 at 6:40 pm to FalseProphet
quote:
I bet the review was ten times more careful in this case, and likely have even included the judge asking advice from other judges concerning the request.
This is optimism bordering on naivetè IMHO.
Posted on 4/11/18 at 6:41 pm to FalseProphet
I have a good friend clerk for a federal magistrate judge. I know she is involved in warrant applications. I am going to ask her what she thinks.
eta: she is hot. No pics.
eta: she is hot. No pics.
Posted on 4/11/18 at 6:41 pm to Iowa Golfer
What's concerning to me is if the primary reason for this raid is the alleged FEC violation. The ordinary remedy for an FEC violation is a civil fine and/or an ADR process (mediation). The Obama campaign in 2008 had FEC violations about 10 times the amount Cohen allegedly paid Stormy and yet nothing happened.
Posted on 4/11/18 at 6:42 pm to NYNolaguy1
Nah. I’ve got some experience in federal criminal matters and know some previous judges who have done this.
It’s the way it SHOULD work. Not saying it did in this case.
It’s the way it SHOULD work. Not saying it did in this case.
Posted on 4/11/18 at 6:42 pm to FalseProphet
Exactly. People pretending this is some novel, massive breach of attorney-client privilege are either neglecting the incredibly high likelihood of substantial evidence which permitted the warrant or are ignorant to the details beyond what they've read on Trump's twitter.
Posted on 4/11/18 at 6:44 pm to SCLibertarian
quote:
What's concerning to me is if the primary reason for this raid is the alleged FEC violation.
Have you read the search warrant? If you haven't, then all you have is the media reports.
I really doubt this is only for a FEC violation.
Posted on 4/11/18 at 6:44 pm to Iowa Golfer
It’s funny that the same people who have no issue with this are against stop and frisk laws . This is stop and Frisk x1000.
We need another agency to do this to the FBI to get all the stuff they are refusing to give to congress. The FBI and democrats would cry if this happens to them .
We need another agency to do this to the FBI to get all the stuff they are refusing to give to congress. The FBI and democrats would cry if this happens to them .
Posted on 4/11/18 at 6:45 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:quote:
I bet the review was ten times more careful in this case, and likely have even included the judge asking advice from other judges concerning the request.
This is optimism bordering on naivetè IMHO.
No, quite the contrary. The belief that this was some unconstitutional overreach is pessimism with respect to lawfully obtained warrants.
Posted on 4/11/18 at 6:45 pm to SCLibertarian
quote:
What's concerning to me is if the primary reason for this raid is the alleged FEC violation.
But we don't know the primary reason, do we?
Posted on 4/11/18 at 6:49 pm to rbWarEagle
quote:
lawfully obtained warrants.
Federal judges are by their very nature authoritarian and deferential to the government. The idea that obtaining a warrant is some difficult procedural task I think ignores the reality that most Federal Magistrates are closer to being a second prosecutor than anything else.
Posted on 4/11/18 at 6:51 pm to Iowa Golfer
quote:
What's stopping them
Absolutely nothing but their good intentions is stopping them, and you know what they say about the road to hell.
This is horrifying to me as an attorney. They may have had to arrest me to get to my email server.
What really makes me want to absolutely PUKE are these news organizations who think it’s some kind of badge of honor that they don’t have to reveal their “anonymous sources”, but they are breathlessly salivating with joy and glee about the FBI having access to every conversation and communication btwn an American citizen and his attorney dating back 10 yrs. it’s disgusting and the ACLU is officially a sham organization.
Posted on 4/11/18 at 6:51 pm to rbWarEagle
quote:
are either neglecting the incredibly high likelihood of substantial evidence which permitted the warrant or are ignorant to the details beyond what they've read on Trump's twitter.
If this was a no name defendant with much less for the prosecuting atty to gain, thats more feasible.
As it is now, theres a very large political interest in finding guilt.
Political prosecution rarely turns out well for either the winning or losing side.
Posted on 4/11/18 at 6:53 pm to SCLibertarian
This whole thing is crazy. By both sides too.
Civil Liberties On/Off, depending which side is getting theirs ripped from them.
As I look at the reactions, the flip flopping, selective civil libertarianism is almost comical.
But it's not funny. This guy wasn't a flight risk. It doesn't sound like he was about to shred documents.
And when will we have the answer about this? Once media leaks start about things they shouldn't have looked at.
Civil Liberties On/Off, depending which side is getting theirs ripped from them.
As I look at the reactions, the flip flopping, selective civil libertarianism is almost comical.
But it's not funny. This guy wasn't a flight risk. It doesn't sound like he was about to shred documents.
And when will we have the answer about this? Once media leaks start about things they shouldn't have looked at.
This post was edited on 4/11/18 at 6:54 pm
Posted on 4/11/18 at 6:55 pm to Scoop
quote:
Going forward, how can there be effective criminal representation......
Only conservatives can not have effective criminal representation in court, on FB, TWTR, in the DOJ, the Senate, House of Reps, etc. Liberals, Deep State, and Swamp people can have effective representation.
Based on how things are today, America is gone.
Trump needs to fire hundreds of political hacks in the DOJ, CIA, NSA, IRS, FBI, EPA, and every gov't organization in the US. O-bama put his people in charge who hired like-minded robots. The gov't is infested with these liberals.
Posted on 4/11/18 at 6:56 pm to brian_wilson
Except they leave a list of items taken with the recipient of the served warrant. So we do know to the extent Michael Dean Cohen has told us, or leaked to the media.
We can assume the official reasons.
Here is what we don't know. The privileged stuff, the stuff they can look at but not use, we don't know they aren't going to use it, and if I had to bet, guess which way smart money and myself are going?
We can assume the official reasons.
Here is what we don't know. The privileged stuff, the stuff they can look at but not use, we don't know they aren't going to use it, and if I had to bet, guess which way smart money and myself are going?
This post was edited on 4/11/18 at 6:58 pm
Posted on 4/11/18 at 6:58 pm to SCLibertarian
quote:
Federal judges are by their very nature authoritarian and deferential to the government. The idea that obtaining a warrant is some difficult procedural task I think ignores the reality that most Federal Magistrates are closer to being a second prosecutor than anything else.
You still must convince a federal judge of the high likelihood of uncovering illegal activity before they give the warrant. I don't see any reason (yet) to believe that the evidence presented was anything less than completely convincing.
ETA: If it comes to light that this evidence was less-than-convincing, I'll gladly admit I was wrong and wring my hands about civil liberty.
This post was edited on 4/11/18 at 7:00 pm
Page 3 of 6
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News