Mueller did EXACTLY what he should have done!

[Lovebug]

The irony in all this is that Republican lawyers relied on by Trump to protect him - in his twisted view that appointed representatives of the law are like any other political being, are the people causing him grief. First Comey, then Sessions, then Rosenstein, and now the head of the New York FBI office, handpicked by Trump and a former law partner of Rudy Giuliani no less. Poor, abused Donald.

Take the name Trump out of the equation for a minute and think about the implications. This goes far beyond Trump and his administration.

 

[apdst]

Mueller uncovered something that he felt may not have been under his jurisdiction so he passed on the information to the agency legally empowered to determine if it was substantive or not. Obviously it was substantive, or subpoenas would not have been granted.

Meuller violated the 4th Amendment.

Even Alan Dershowitz agrees that attorney client priviledge died with the raid on Cohen's office.

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/04/10/trump-attorney-client-privilege-dead-dershowitz-well-yeah/

You're rights are being stripped away and you cheer.

 

[Mach]

Correction the warrant was due to cohen actions nothing to do with trump.

Who are you correcting? They seized all of Cohen's communications, and were authorized to do so.

to view or use any of those messages or anyone else's they would have to get a court order deeming that they violated the law. only a court can remove attorney client privilege.
until that happens those messages are protected.

Uh, what? See above, it requires probable cause and a lot of high-level approvals. That's it.

To view the documents, they follow their job manual, you can also educate yourself here:
https://www.justice.gov/usam/usam-9-13000-obtaining-evidence#9-13.420

While every effort should be made to avoid viewing privileged material, the search may require limited review of arguably privileged material to ascertain whether the material is covered by the warrant. Therefore, to protect the attorney-client privilege and to ensure that the investigation is not compromised by exposure to privileged material relating to the investigation or to defense strategy, a "privilege team" should be designated, consisting of agents and lawyers not involved in the underlying investigation.

Instructions should be given and thoroughly discussed with the privilege team prior to the search. The instructions should set forth procedures designed to minimize the intrusion into privileged material, and should ensure that the privilege team does not disclose any information to the investigation/prosecution team unless and until so instructed by the attorney in charge of the privilege team. Privilege team lawyers should be available either on or off-site, to advise the agents during the course of the search, but should not participate in the search itself.

The affidavit in support of the search warrant may attach any written instructions or, at a minimum, should generally state the government's intention to employ procedures designed to ensure that attorney-client privileges are not violated.

If it is anticipated that computers will be searched or seized, prosecutors are expected to follow the procedures set forth in the current edition of Searching and Seizing Computers, published by CCIPS.
Review Procedures. The following review procedures should be discussed prior to approval of any warrant, consistent with the practice in your district, the circumstances of the investigation and the volume of materials seized.

So no, if they got approval and knew Cohen was an attorney, it's been approved already. Its then up to the taint team and their lead to decide what is excluded or not.
Later, if it goes to court and the defense argues it was not exempt, that's a dispute unrelated to this.

 

[Mach]

Take the name Trump out of the equation for a minute and think about the implications. This goes far beyond Trump and his administration.

Trump's boy Guiliani disagrees with your right-wing extremist nonsense;

“Is this surprising? Yes,” said Giuliani, a former U.S. attorney. “Is it extraordinary? No. This is the way prosecutors get information — sometimes to convict and prosecute, sometimes to exculpate.”

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/04/ru...-no-big-deal-way-prosecutors-get-information/

 

[Lovebug]

Trump's boy Guiliani disagrees with your right-wing extremist nonsense;


https://www.rawstory.com/2018/04/ru...-no-big-deal-way-prosecutors-get-information/

You agree with Guilliani and call me partisan in the same sentence?

 

[Mach]

You agree with Guilliani and call me partisan in the same sentence?

So you agree there are no big implications here?

 

[Mycroft]

Common practice.

How will they identify what is relevant, if they already knew what was relevant before taking it? That's illogical.


No. Better still, even the FBI team investigating Cohen WILL NOT HAVE ACCESS TO IT.
They assign a separate team (not an individual like say...just Trey Gowdy) of career professionals called a "taint team" apparently. These people are told what specific crimes they are authorized to look for, who they suspect communicated, etc. They then use that information to investigate the communications, and only those that meet those criteria, as approved by the team to be excluded from attorney client privilege (either it doesn't apply or it's a crime-fraud exception), can that information be handed to the investigators.

Since Mueller's team is not conducting this, I do not think he will have access to any of it, it would remain with the FBI investigators assigned to this case. If they do not find evidence sufficient to indict, it will be locked up/returned, and no one can release/discuss it (routine practice).

I understand what you are saying, but I cannot help but think about the Weiner laptop situation. It was seized in relation to his sex case, but Hillary emails were found on it and turned over to other FBI people...even though those emails had nothing to do with the sex case.

Now...I'm sure the FBI did that legally (at least I hope they did), so is there a legal loophole that would allow Mueller to get his hands on some Cohen stuff that he would otherwise be unable to get?

 

[JackA]

Take the name Trump out of the equation for a minute and think about the implications. This goes far beyond Trump and his administration.

The chief implication is that even in the age of Trump the law is still not for sale.

 

[Lovebug]

So you agree there are no big implications here?

No. Put yourself in the situation. I listened to Rand Paul this morning and he made perfect sense. ( copied the first link I could find, so please pay attention to Paul's words and not the source of the article)
https://www.conservativereview.com/...abused-authority-every-american-citizen-next/

 

[Lovebug]

The chief implication is that even in the age of Trump the law is still not for sale.

You keep harping on Trump. I am looking beyond that.

 

[Elroy Bean]

Yes, but don't hold that against him when he announces that Trump is in the clear.

Which he will do in July-August of this year. Just remember all these events that make it appear as if Mueller is going hard and heavy against all-things-Trump is most likely to show clear evidence that Mueller isn't biased in favor of Trump.

Remember that and try not to whine when it happens.

You presume too much. If Trump is cleared so let it be known that it is time to move forward. The thing is, even without Mueller's investigation, Trump is still a filthy, self-absorbed liar whose transgressions are forgiven because of the tentacles of money.

 

[ludin]

Who are you correcting? They seized all of Cohen's communications, and were authorized to do so.

which is more than likely unconstitutional.

Uh, what? See above, it requires probable cause and a lot of high-level approvals. That's it.

They have to establish that the other communications they seized are involved in that case.
they cannot just go through stuff and start convicting people. they have to prove that there was a crime committed
even if there was a crime committed the only evidence allowed is that pertaining to that crime.
anything outside of that is privilege. the FBI can't go on fishing expeditions to find a crime.

yes please educate yourself.

https://www.justice.gov/usam/usam-9-13000-obtaining-evidence#9-13.420

So no, if they got approval and knew Cohen was an attorney, it's been approved already. Its then up to the taint team and their lead to decide what is excluded or not.
Later, if it goes to court and the defense argues it was not exempt, that's a dispute unrelated to this.

they got approval for to look for evidence he was accused of. that does not mean they can go through all of his client files.
there are limits to their search.

anything further than that has to go to court.
IE they can't go through trumps emails or file unless they have probable cause to do so and a court allows it.

 

[Mach]

I understand what you are saying, but I cannot help but think about the Weiner laptop situation. It was seized in relation to his sex case, but Hillary emails were found on it and turned over to other FBI people...even though those emails had nothing to do with the sex case.

That was not attorney client privileged though. They have to use a taint team on this, regardless.
Remember, this is law enforcement, if they are doing their lawful job and see evidence of a crime, they are obligated to pursue it (and should!).
Trump is widely reported not to use email because he's a sketchy mofo though. (although Cohen may take email notes of their conversations).

Now...I'm sure the FBI did that legally (at least I hope they did), so is there a legal loophole that would allow Mueller to get his hands on some Cohen stuff that he would otherwise be unable to get?

Doesn't seem likely. It's a separate team altogether. The shock and awe may be used in this case to shake Trump, I don't know. And I say shake Trump because we know he knew about it, but he's continually lying about it, and his buddy is taking the fall. Justice doesn't like to see a fall guy, they want the truth of the crime to come out fully.

Trump's biggest legal jeopardy for Trump on this seems to be about this case and not about Mueller/Russia at all. Basically it is because Trump has been lying, and saying that Stormy is lying about the affair. That's 100% Trump's fault for both the affair and claiming she's a liar. This allowed for Avanatti to turn it into a defamation case. Then with Avanatti's deft maneuvering, he's got Trump and Cohen on the ropes in a number of nuanced ways that you can look up. Well, you can see Cohen is on the ropes without having to look anything up at this point.

 

[Mach]

which is more than likely unconstitutional.

Standard, documented Justice Department procedure is unconstitutional? Based on what? Your professional opinion? Hilarious.

They have to establish that the other communications they seized are involved in that case.

And they use the taint team to do that.

they cannot just go through stuff and start convicting people. they have to prove that there was a crime committed

lol, this is prosecution/investigation, they don't convict anyway, they indict or recommend it to another group. What you are typing makes no sense.

even if there was a crime committed the only evidence allowed is that pertaining to that crime.
anything outside of that is privilege. the FBI can't go on fishing expeditions to find a crime.

Who claimed they would?
Who claimed they could?

they got approval for to look for evidence he was accused of. that does not mean they can go through all of his client files.
there are limits to their search.

Who claimed they could?

 

[RabidAlpaca]

I have no idea what you people are talking about.

Mueller brought the Cohen information he had to his boss. His boss decided there was enough merit there to refer it to the NY DA. The NY DA goes to a judge in NY for a warrant because he determines that there is a case with merit and that he needs a warrant to move forward. The judge grants the warrant. The FBI sends out a taint team to execute the warrant so that information and material not relevant to the warrant can be segregated from material relevant to the warrant. That taint team will never be part of a prosecution team in any of these cases. The segregated material that is relevant to the warrant is then handed off to the actual prosecution team and the FBI agents associated with it and the taint team and the prosecution team staff paths never cross.

I suspect that there is every chance that this is about Cohen potential crimes because Cohen is a blundering bonehead with no moral compass to guide him, hence a high likelihood that he has done things as trump's fixer that do expose him to indictment which came to light. Trump has already exposed Cohen to disbarment in abandoning Cohen to his own stupidity and lack of moral compass.

The real story here is that given how many skeletons trump and trump sycophants have in their closets, trump never should have run for office and the GOP should have forced him to release his tax returns before naming him as their nominee. Had the GOP done that, we never would have heard another thing about trump as a possible candidate for the presidency and we would not now be enduring this national nightmare.

I'd never heard that term before, taint team, but it sounds like a fair way of doing things. Thanks for sharing this.

 

[Floridafan]

I know enough that it has been upheld in the Supreme Court, and to know that the legal work around to attorney-client privilege is not calling some goons to kick down the attorney's door.

Another legal expert who never spent single day in a law school. What other professions are you an expert on?

 

[independentusa]

That was not attorney client privileged though. They have to use a taint team on this, regardless.
Remember, this is law enforcement, if they are doing their lawful job and see evidence of a crime, they are obligated to pursue it (and should!).
Trump is widely reported not to use email because he's a sketchy mofo though. (although Cohen may take email notes of their conversations).


Doesn't seem likely. It's a separate team altogether. The shock and awe may be used in this case to shake Trump, I don't know. And I say shake Trump because we know he knew about it, but he's continually lying about it, and his buddy is taking the fall. Justice doesn't like to see a fall guy, they want the truth of the crime to come out fully.

Trump's biggest legal jeopardy for Trump on this seems to be about this case and not about Mueller/Russia at all. Basically it is because Trump has been lying, and saying that Stormy is lying about the affair. That's 100% Trump's fault for both the affair and claiming she's a liar. This allowed for Avanatti to turn it into a defamation case. Then with Avanatti's deft maneuvering, he's got Trump and Cohen on the ropes in a number of nuanced ways that you can look up. Well, you can see Cohen is on the ropes without having to look anything up at this point.

Actually the taint team goes through the persons stuff to see which is covered by the warrant and which is not. Even if they see something that is a violation of the law, that is not covered by the warrant they can not use it or even mention it. The taint team then passes on the stuff to the team that will determine if any of the stuff covered by the warrant is usable to prove the person in question guilty of the crimes covered by the warrant.

 

[Mach]

No. Put yourself in the situation. I listened to Rand Paul this morning and he made perfect sense. ( copied the first link I could find, so please pay attention to Paul's words and not the source of the article)
https://www.conservativereview.com/...abused-authority-every-american-citizen-next/

Rand Paul, a Republican politician, is kind of a nutter, and he's saying he opposes all special prosecutors (past and present)? as they always abuse power (not true!).
Mueller's team is being worked professional under the AG, in a timely fashion, there is nothing strange or untoward going on, no abuse of power. Republican congress, Republican AG....they could shut it down but they don't....because it's above board.

Here's the reality:
1. Republican President Richard Nixon, in an attempt to cover up his crimes, abuses power in the Saturday Night Massacre, claiming he can fire at will to stop himself from being compelled to provide documentation of his actions in office, by way of the special prosecutor assigned to investigate him.

2. Democrats winning a majority on congress after this scandal, pass the Ethics in Government act of 1978 to make this abuse of power much more difficult. This set up the office of special counsel, along with making public servant records a form of public property (paraphrase). Requires a 3 judge panel to approve it, among other things.

3. Republicans appear to abuse it yet again with Ken Starr who investigated Whitewater, and later meandered off into other areas, including Cinton's personal affair and the Lewinski perjury, resulting in impeachment.

4. Bi-partisan agreement allows that law to expire in 1999 and special counsel is rolled up under the AG where it has a more proper home, and currently resides today under new special counsel regulations.

So it has been consistently revised, as a result primarily due to Republican abuses, in large part by Democrats and bi-partisan action.

https://www.axios.com/how-special-c...396-85d7a228-ae27-4589-b083-5c4eec9d94ac.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_prosecutor


(OMG not your fault obviously but third time I've had to type this...arghh!)

 

[JackA]

No. Put yourself in the situation. I listened to Rand Paul this morning and he made perfect sense. ( copied the first link I could find, so please pay attention to Paul's words and not the source of the article)
https://www.conservativereview.com/...abused-authority-every-american-citizen-next/

The "problem" Paul refers to without expressing it is the exposure of criminal conduct that political bigwigs are accustomed to getting away with by burying it. Special prosecutors are a threat to shine light where light doesn't usually shine. The raid on Cohen's office and personal residences was sanctioned by a federal judge upon a showing of probable cause of criminal conduct. That is the standard for issuance of the warrant that was granted the FBI in this instance. I don't have a lot of sympathy for a politician - in this case Rand Paul - who is upset over a court authorized warrant to investigate a crime because the crime may implicate someone used to having his money and importance shield him.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Good try, but attorney-client privilege is attorney client privilege

Sorry, but attorney-client privilege is not a commit-a-crime-free card.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

No. Put yourself in the situation. I listened to Rand Paul this morning and he made perfect sense. ( copied the first link I could find, so please pay attention to Paul's words and not the source of the article)
https://www.conservativereview.com/...abused-authority-every-american-citizen-next/

Rand Paul has no idea what was contained in the search warrant application. But a federal judge did, and the judge disagreed with him.

 

[ludin]

Standard, documented Justice Department procedure is unconstitutional? Based on what? Your professional opinion? Hilarious.

They can only seize what is pretained to the warrant. They can't seize everything and go on a fishing expedition.

And they use the taint team to do that.
lol, this is prosecution/investigation, they don't convict anyway, they indict or recommend it to another group. What you are typing makes no sense.

again even the so called taint team cannot nose through all of the files. they can only look at files related to the warrant and or accusations.

Who claimed they would?
Who claimed they could?
Who claimed they could?

you should follow the thread more carefully then you wouldn't have to ask these questions.

 

[ludin]

Actually the taint team goes through the persons stuff to see which is covered by the warrant and which is not. Even if they see something that is a violation of the law, that is not covered by the warrant they can not use it or even mention it. The taint team then passes on the stuff to the team that will determine if any of the stuff covered by the warrant is usable to prove the person in question guilty of the crimes covered by the warrant.

They can't even do that. They have to do to court and get a court order first to overthrow attorney client privilege.

 

[Mach]

They can only seize what is pretained to the warrant. They can't seize everything and go on a fishing expedition.

Who claimed they went on a fishing expedition?

again even the so called taint team cannot nose through all of the files. they can only look at files related to the warrant and or accusations.

Who claimed they could?

you should follow the thread more carefully then you wouldn't have to ask these questions.

So you have no idea, I accept your admitted ignorance on the matter.

 

[HowardBThiname]

You presume too much. If Trump is cleared so let it be known that it is time to move forward.

I think it's unlikely that the Left will move on any time soon. But, that's where all of Mueller's digging is supposed to lead, to an unquestionable conclusion.

The thing is, even without Mueller's investigation, Trump is still a filthy, self-absorbed liar whose transgressions are forgiven because of the tentacles of money.

What's the old saying -- let whomever is innocent cast the first stone? Granted, we've had Presidents who were better able to control what they said -- but -- I don't know of one President who wasn't a liar.

It's what they do.