- 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 7:02 pm to rbWarEagle
Posted on 4/11/18 at 7:02 pm to rbWarEagle
quote:
I don't see any reason (yet) to believe that the evidence presented was anything less than completely convincing.
And if it wasn’t clear and convincing? Theres just no way to un-ring the bell. Judges make mistakes. That’s why there are appeal courts. This is chilling.
2
Posted on 4/11/18 at 7:02 pm to rbWarEagle
quote:
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.
Sorry I have trouble having your amount of faith with political stakes like this. Its just as likely the applicant called in a political favor or made some sort of other... arrangement.
Posted on 4/11/18 at 7:05 pm to Wednesday
quote:
That’s why there are appeal courts.
Thays also why there is absolute immunity to protect judges might be influenced in a certain direction. US judges also dont have to worry about relection or re-appointment either, so theres very little recourse for the average defendant.
Posted on 4/11/18 at 7:07 pm to rbWarEagle
quote:
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.
not to mention that there is a recourse in the courts for Cohen if the warrant was issued for political purposes.
Posted on 4/11/18 at 7:07 pm to Wednesday
quote:
And if it wasn’t clear and convincing?
As I said, I'll gladly join you in the outcry for civil liberty. I truly hope that isn't the case for the sake of the country.
Posted on 4/11/18 at 7:11 pm to NYNolaguy1
I agree with you. Was just trying to make the point that no judge is infallible. It is dangerous to have a system that assumes that a judge would never make an erroneous ruling. Seems to me that once the deed is done and you’ve let the cops know all your secrets, they can never unknow it. Trump is a billionaire and the most powerful person on earth. The thought of what a more normal criminal defendant may have to be up against without that safeguard is disheartening.
Posted on 4/11/18 at 7:12 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
Sorry I have trouble having your amount of faith with political stakes like this.
I get that.
quote:
Its just as likely the applicant called in a political favor or made some sort of other... arrangement.
I don't think it's "just as likely".
Posted on 4/11/18 at 7:13 pm to Wednesday
quote:
It is dangerous to have a system that assumes that a judge would never make an erroneous ruling.
Are there not numerous fail-safes in place that require the warrant request to be approved on multiple levels?
Posted on 4/11/18 at 7:15 pm to Scoop
Don’t hire a sketchy lawyer/fixer
Cohen says he is a fixer. Being a fixer has almost nothing to do with being a lawyer.
When Cohen acted as his lawyer he was not good at it or he would have had better NDA’s without a line for Trump to sign.
Trump is wealthy enough and had good personal lawyers. When he had legal trouble as businessman Cohen was not his lawyer.
When Avenatti beat Trump in a legal case(Trump settled) Cohen was not his lawyer in the proceedings.
Cohen maybe his lawyer, but he acts as his fixer. This is what many people are confused about and Cohen is in trouble not as his lawyer, but as his fixer.
Cohen says he is a fixer. Being a fixer has almost nothing to do with being a lawyer.
When Cohen acted as his lawyer he was not good at it or he would have had better NDA’s without a line for Trump to sign.
Trump is wealthy enough and had good personal lawyers. When he had legal trouble as businessman Cohen was not his lawyer.
When Avenatti beat Trump in a legal case(Trump settled) Cohen was not his lawyer in the proceedings.
Cohen maybe his lawyer, but he acts as his fixer. This is what many people are confused about and Cohen is in trouble not as his lawyer, but as his fixer.
This post was edited on 4/11/18 at 7:17 pm
Posted on 4/11/18 at 7:29 pm to brian_wilson
quote:
not to mention that there is a recourse in the courts for Cohen if the warrant was issued for political purposes.
By going after whom exactly? Not the judge. Is he going to go after Mueller?
Posted on 4/11/18 at 7:37 pm to Scoop
Criminal representation would be whoever Cohen's lawyer is
Posted on 4/11/18 at 7:44 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
Is he going to go after Mueller?
It can be a 1983 action against anyone government official involved.
This post was edited on 4/11/18 at 7:46 pm
Posted on 4/11/18 at 7:51 pm to Iowa Golfer
quote:
Well, so they bill, and document I asked a tax question.
It's not detailed in an email. As an example, an email asking can I depreciate intellectual property twice if it is used by two separate entities both owned by myself? And if I have a bunch of detailed emails like these. And then they come in and say he has shown a pattern of attempting to do illegal things, even though I'm just asking questions.
I also consult a lot about how to fire people. I could see that being twisted into a pattern of discrimination.
Ad infinitium..
Paranoid? Or prudent in light of recent event? I'm choosing option #2.
So you'll only talk to your attorney by phone, but you'll come to a public forum and tell us examples of shite you said that could be considered discriminatory or fraudulent?
Nice.
Posted on 4/11/18 at 7:54 pm to CorporateTiger
quote:
It can be a 1983 action against anyone government official involved.
I have a better chance of getting visited by two time travelling guys in a flying deloreon than him winning a 1983 action against a special counsel.
The best he can hope for is it getting quashed under equal political pressure.
This post was edited on 4/11/18 at 8:01 pm
Posted on 4/11/18 at 7:56 pm to slackster
You're not bright. You think you are, but you're pretty far removed from real world business.
Posted on 4/11/18 at 7:59 pm to CorporateTiger
quote:
There is no reason that they couldn’t have just asked him to provide whatever info they were looking for (even via subpoena) and let Cohen sort thru it and remove the privileged info
You mean the special treatment given only to HRC? Taking the files and having a magistrate or LEO clean team sort them is *much* more typical.
I thought if you said you didnt intend to break the law the FBI had to asist you in destroying the evidence of your unintentional bad act, no?
Posted on 4/11/18 at 8:01 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
I have a better chance of getting visited by two time travelling guys in a flying deloreon than him winning a 1983 action against a special counsel.
The best he can hope for is it getting quashed.
It isn't likely, but if it was ever proven the warrant was politically motivated the 1983 action is out there.
Posted on 4/11/18 at 8:02 pm to More&Les
quote:
I thought if you said you didnt intend to break the law the FBI had to asist you in destroying the evidence of your unintentional bad act, no?
I'm not sure what your point is? HRC got special treatment. This FBI raid is much more typical of normal LEO procedure. I am criticizing the way the HRC matter was handled.
Posted on 4/11/18 at 8:04 pm to Iowa Golfer
quote:
You're not bright. You think you are, but you're pretty far removed from real world business.
, and you've established this because I pointed out your logical inconsistency? 
Posted on 4/11/18 at 8:07 pm to Iowa Golfer
quote:
Never, and I mean never hire attorneys that support this.
Translated, only hire lawyers who will do illegal shite behind closed doors and deserve disbarment for not following the rules.
If your lawyer is assisting you in committing a crime, your attorney-client privilege means shite.
Page 4 of 6
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News